Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Half-Life mods

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete, despite sockpuppetry. Not one valid 'keep' vote. Proto::type 16:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Half-Life mods[edit]

This is a nomination for List of Half-Life mods (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and List of Half-Life 2 mods (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).

Both have been nominated for deletion before. List of Half-Life mods was deleted two weeks ago, while List of Half-Life 2 mods was kept in February. List of Half-Life mods was created anew shortly after its deletion. It was tagged with db-repost, but de-tagged following this comment:

This article is not a repost of the original article, in the AfD it was mentioned that it can be created again "if someone wants to turn it into an acceptable article rather than a directory" (source), also an admin said "this needs to be changed significantly before it is reposted" (source), which I have done - it is changed significantly. Please compare with the original article. And excuse me if I haven't listed every notable mod already, that's why it's a stub plus I only had a few hours time. --Pizzahut2 21:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I am opening this discussion in order to achieve a consensus once and for all; should these articles be retained? Both articles, especially List of Half-Life 2 mods still looks more or less like a directory (which Wikipedia is not). Punkmorten 12:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

      • Note: The AfD template on the List of HL2 mods page was vandalized. It's been reverted. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 16:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory. MER-C 12:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The article still doesn't address the notability of mods, which I believe to be non-existent. - Mgm|(talk) 12:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and merge the notable (i.e. blue-linked) mods into the respective game articles (if they're not mentioned there already; both articles have "Mods" sections). Demiurge 13:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Should this AfD go through, I guess it's only fair to also have a look at the other mod lists: List of Battlefield 1942 mods, List of Call of Duty mods, List of Grand Theft Auto multiplayer mods --Pizzahut2 20:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply I tagged the Battlefield and CoD with notability and unsourced tags and prodded the GTA page. The Kinslayer 10:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, listcruft, whatever useful information in these lists, merge it into somewhere suitable. WP:NOT a directory applies here too. --Terence Ong (C | R) 00:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep, it can be used as a very useful reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunderpower (talk • contribs) 03:28, 24 November 2006
  • Strong Keep, not only was the HL2 mod list nominated for deletion earlier and unanimously kept, it is very useful and is not a directory. As well, it's just like Pizzahut 2 said: Go look at other mod lists and delete them all before deleting this one. User:CPTGbr 04:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete and merge per Demiurge. Other mod lists should be deleted as well. TJ Spyke 05:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both, useful lists. VegaDark 09:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep both, very useful list. Gives a better view of the original game by showing some 3rd party work that was made for them. Snewerl 19:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Edgecution 00:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep, I'm with Thunderpower. Very useful reference. It's not a directory, it's the best way to place the numerous mods for HL2 into an article without giving each individual mod an article. Chef Brian 02:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Both - These lists have always been an important reference for me, and some other members of the internet public that I know. One single point we can come to, read about the latest releases, publicly made up to date by Wiki submitters. Sure, I agree that there should perhaps be more links to smaller articles about the individual mods, however, how would we then know what to search for without this resource. --JamminR 02:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC) — JamminR (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Strong Keep As above, very useful reference page, best way to keep mods without merging into HL2 itself. DannyB!! 12:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. PresN 05:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep, although like any list it should include only encyclopedic (that is, notable) mods. There are plenty of those to populate the list, however. — brighterorange (talk) 00:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete and merge Mods of true note should have either their own page (a la counter-strike) or shouldn't exist - bare in mind I've worked on the HL2 mods page a little bit so I'm actually voting to remove some of my own efforts. Shan 04:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Both are good lists, both are valid forks of the main articles, both contain notable content. --- RockMFR 07:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the precedent of deleting the List of Half-Life mods. The Kinslayer 09:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep since more than one of those mods became commercially produced games, and one of those became the most popular online game I believe that it belongs. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 16:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, because a couple of the mods on the list are big, we should definitly have a huge unmanageabvle list of every mod for HL2 with no limits on who can put their 2-bit never-to-be-finished mod on it. (Irony over.) Seriously, if the mod is big, then people will look for it's article directly, and if the game isn't that big, and doesn't have an article, it should not be included on an indiscriminate list as who would be looking for further information on something they never heard of? And as always, the 'if X and Y have an article then E, H and Z should be mentioned' arguement doesn't hold water. The Kinslayer 16:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but the problem is that every time we add a page for a mod that is notable someone post a adf and since there will be always someone that disagres they end up deleted even if we post prof of the notability (there will be always some Admin that disagres and it will delete it) Snewerl 20:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not an indiscriminate list, the List of Half-Life mods at least only has mods which either gained awards, made it to the Mod Of The Year feature or have their own article. It's easy to change the List of Half-Life 2 mods the same way, infact it's been done already. --Pizzahut2 00:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and now that list has only 6 games, 2 with articles, and at least 3 of the others are notable enough to have articles that would be kept, therefore the list is serving no useful purpose because the mods are big enough that people would be looking for the articles directly without the need of the list. The Kinslayer 10:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There already have been articles about some of the mods in the past, and they have been deleted. Not only Azure Sheep [1], but Sven-cop, too. [2] Snewerl has a point. --Pizzahut2 11:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Azure Sheep was only deleted because no-one removed the prod from it, which is lot different from an AfD. As for Sven, I don't quite follow that one. It was AfD, then recreated a month later following an appeal, then promptly deleted 5 minutes later by the same guy? What does he mean by 'userfied'? The Kinslayer 11:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy is what admins do if there is a request to copy a deleted article to a personal (user) page, like this one. Point of View was also deleted. [3] [4] --Pizzahut2 11:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I understand now, thanks for that. The way I see it, a lot of Mods were caught off-guard with that purge a couple of months back and had their pages deleted, but I'm sure that mods like sven could re-create their pages and have them kept, as long as they made sure they paid special attention to establishing notability and providing sources. But I guess we are deviating from the point of this discussion a bit now! The Kinslayer 11:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Azure Sheep had at least a review in a computer magazine and other stuff that was reason for notability (not sure what you mean as prod). Point of View had a award from ModDB and other stuff that also were reason for notability. They got deleted just the same. As I said before there will be always some Admin that disagres and it will delete it. Snewerl 09:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Moving indent back a a bit) A prod is when someone puts up a tag saying they believe the article should be deleted. If the tag is left untouched for 5 days, the article is deleted without a second thought. This was what happened to Azure Sheep. All that was needed was someone to remove the Prod tag and the article wouldn't have been deleted, although most contested prods usually end up becomming AfDs, but at least people would have had a chance to argue their point. And whether an article is deleted or not is never down to just the admin. All the admin does is look at the arguements and have to decide which side makes the better arguement, and even then there is various appeals processes for people who disagree with a decision. The Kinslayer 09:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I admit it's somewhat useless information for some people, but for people who search for a big reference list of Half-Life 2 mods it is very useful. I myself have found some of the best mods/mods in making I know here. It does need some work, maybe a re-do or just dust off a bit of trash, but a definive "Keep" in my opinion. BurstFire 21:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is the thing, the arguement that this be deleted is that WP:NOT indiscriminate information, a repository of links or an online directory, but so far the only argument to keep it is 'But I've found this list useful' which I don't really think is a convincing enough arguement for us to ignore a wiki policy (several parts of that poilicy to boot.) The Kinslayer 11:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and merge per Demiurge, however also merge the mods which don't have their own article. (They still have some notability, as they've either got awards or appear in Mod DB's Mod Of The Year feature.) --Pizzahut2 23:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As a developer of SourceForts, I feel that some may find my opinion on this AfD biased, so I'll refrain from "voting," but I find this article useful and think it should be kept. - 71.233.96.192 10:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm probably also biased as recreator / main contributor. How I can be biased when I voted delete? Because I wasted too much time and energy in this. I guess I'm a bit burned out. --Pizzahut2 10:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I personally don't see a problem with a bias as long as a person states the fact but can still provide a level-headed arguement to back up their point of view. (I mean, you could say I'm biased as a non-contributor to this article really.) The Kinslayer 10:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Mods. Herostratus 16:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Wow, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm convinced to change to a keep by this award-winning arguement. <endirony> The Kinslayer 16:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Deleting this lists practically destroys several pages of useful information on WikiPedia to Half-Life players.WaltCip 14:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment How? Deleting the lists isn't getting rid of any the articles mentioned in the lists. So it's actually two pages not several. The Kinslayer 14:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lists_of_Half-Life_mods&oldid=1138028941"