Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Wikipedian Game

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. WP:NFT. -- œ^™ 09:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedian Game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's page on wikipedia about a project on wikipedia. It goes without saying this particular project has no real outside sources or references. I guess a redirect would be alright, but want to bring it to the community first. Shadowjams (talk) 07:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

• Delete Non-notable game, every mention on google is from a blog or something of exactly reliability. Does not need its own article. Angryapathy (talk) 15:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete You have to play the game by the rules, in this case WP:N. Borock (talk) 15:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, but I wonder how many clicks it would take to get from here to Kevin Bacon.--Milowent (talk) 15:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as above. coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 22:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Do you want to play a game?. Already exists on Wikipedia:Wiki Game. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 00:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think that this is a valuable contribution to Wikipedia, and my solid Wikipedian posse will agree with me. Jonny4026 (talk) 09:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I, a member of Jonny4026's solid Wikipedian posse, think that this article should be kept. It is a valid contribution to the website. Paulmchisback (talk) 09:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if being part of the posse includes being a WP:SOCKPUPPET? At bare minimum there is WP:SPI happening here. Both of you also fail to mention any guidelines that show that this can be kept. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps the votes were intended to be humorous. The article has no chance, of course.--Milowent (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so getting my posse on you, now. Humorous, indeed. How very dare you? Jonny4026 (talk) 08:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Christ, have you considered that we're friends and we want to see the page kept? Take a look at our user pages, it's blatantly obvious that we're different people. Paulmchisback (talk) 08:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The game really needs to be perfected before an article can be written about it. I suggest a provision that you have to chug a beer if you run across a mention of The Simpsons or to Family Guy. Everyone has to take a drink if they see the phrase "citation needed", and if you run across a "nominated for deletion" box, you move into the lightning round, where you have to guess how many times the words "non-notable", "indiscriminate" and "civil" will come up. Mandsford (talk) 14:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wow, this looks painfully boring. JBsupreme (talk) 23:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. We have deleted at least 29 other incarnations of this same game before, as indicated by the list on my user page. This version is no better than any of those others. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Six degrees of Kevin Bacon. Or delete. Bearian (talk) 03:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep And if you'd actually checked either of our user pages, it would become obvious that I and paulmchisback are completely different people. Sukh off. Jonny4026 (talk) 08:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I've struck this !vote as a duplicate.--Milowent (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll strike you off as a duplicate. Jonny4026 (talk) 09:18, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to be civil to all other participants in a discussion. Ad hominem attacks should never be used in a discussion. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 10:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, do you ever wonder why Wikipedia gets a bad name for its editors? Chill out, it was intended as a humorous jibe! Paulmchisback (talk) 11:22, 4 December 2009 (UTC) penis[reply]

Alas, I think that my posse and I are outnumbered. Oh well, it was good while it lasted. History will remember us for what we did here today. Jonny4026 (talk) 11:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Today, it might remember us. But tomorrow, History probably won't remember us for what we did here. Mandsford (talk) 14:07, 4 December 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.