Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wheel of Fortune wheel configuration

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 redirect to Wheel of Fortune (U.S. game show). None of those favouring retention give any policy or guideline based reasoning for retaining unsourced content, so their argument is weakened. The strength of the debate is to merge and redirect. I will enact this through a close to redirect to the main article, but the content will remain in the article history for any merging that is required Fritzpoll (talk) 13:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wheel of Fortune wheel configuration[edit]

The wheel configuration article was redirected a few days ago but an IP undid it. Previous afds for both articles resulted in a keep. No attempt has been made to source these articles, and I really can't see any potential sources forthcoming. As big a part of the show as these are, you'd think there would be sources but even with my extensive game show knowledge I've found bupkis, nor do I see any attempt to source the articles. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 22:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to main article. It's valuable content, but not enough for a stand-alone article. Eddie.willers (talk) 02:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Go to WP:MRFD Deletion is not the proper way to deal with a contested redirect. If the person who undid the redirect can't voice actionable concerns, their action should simply be reverted. If there are worries content was lost a merge should be discussed. Either way losing the redirect because someone disagreed with it, is not a good thing. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not proposing a merge. I'm proposing a deletion because I don't think the content should be anywhere. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 18:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying you're suggesting one. I'm saying reinstating the redirect is better. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why redirect if I want to get rid of the information? A redirect of "Wheel of Fortune wheel configuration" wouldn't make sense if information on the wheel's configuration isn't in the parent article at all. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 20:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not contesting that it should be deleted, I'm merely trying to point out that you're going about it the wrong way. If the title was originally a redirect, then it must be for a reason. Either something was merged and later deleted (which should get a discussion) or it was deemed a useful redirect. Neither is a case for AFD. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep: I think it would be upsetting to some fans of Wheel of Fortune to redirect/delete this article. Let's not upset our fans.--Tomballguy (talk) 02:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Chris[reply]
Keep, or merge and redirect. There is some info on the wheel configuration the main article, so if none of the info were to be merged the redirect would still be appropriate. And I see no good reason not to have info on the puzzle categories in the main article, if not in a separate list. DHowell (talk) 05:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge. I also think the tags about "too much intricate detail" should be removed from the main article. It's a game show; the article should explain the rules of the game. Squidfryerchef (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment Even though at this point nobody but the nominator is arguing for deletion, I'm relisting this in hopes of some discussion about the sourcing. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Incredible article, this is what makes wikipedia so popular. Ikip (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Every single keep vote has been WP:NOHARM or WP:ILIKEIT. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 13:13, 23 April 2009 (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.