Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games

WP:DSGAMES

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Games: board, card, etc. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Games: board, card, etc. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Games-related deletions

Mylläri convention

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

Unsourced article about a bridge convention. Fails verification and a possible hoax or WP:A11 invention; unclear why this would be notable even if it could be verified. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dice pool

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

Effectively unreferenced, outside few mentions of this in particular games. While my BEFORE confirms that the terms appear here and there, I cannot find any WP:SIGCOV of this. This seems to fail WP:V and WP:GNG. Not sure if redirecting this do dice is even warranted. Note that the article is also incorrect - it limits this concept to RPGs, but it also appears in board games (but it is really a very niche and minor part of all such games). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I sorted through about 8-10 hits in Google Scholar to come up with three that I believe appropriately demonstrate this mechanic is covered adequately in RS to meet GNG.
Liu, A. J. (2022). Icepool: Efficient Computation of Dice Pool Probabilities. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment, 18(1), 258-265. https://doi.org/10.1609/aiide.v18i1.21971 Wonderful paper, totally about dice pools, from the proceedings of a conference I've actually heard about.

Ovard, Caleb, "Your Mission, Should You Choose to Attempt it, is to Save the Mona Lisa! Gamification as a Method for Teaching Art" (2023). Theses and Dissertations. 10236. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/10236 Very detailed discussion with examples of dice pool mechanics. It's a master's thesis, not published elsewhere.

T. Mott, M. Higger, A. Bejarano and T. Williams, "Degrees of Freedom: A Storytelling Game that Supports Technology Literacy about Social Robots," 2024 33rd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (ROMAN), Pasadena, CA, USA, 2024, pp. 2095-2102, doi: 10.1109/RO-MAN60168.2024.10731340. Could say more about the dice pool, really just describes its use and origin, but it's a journal from a very well respected professional society. Jclemens (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added one of the above sources as a definition of the term, and have referenced a game designer's article to explain why the dice pool is used in games. I think a lot of the other material in the article could be shortened or even removed, but as it stands, I believe the article now explains the term and is accurately sourced.Guinness323 (talk) 19:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per everything found and added by Jclemens and Guinness323. BOZ (talk) 02:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chef RPG

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

Referenced only two primary sources from YouTube and a web store. Before search did not present anything that makes this game notable for an entry here Mekomo (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Games, and Canada. Mekomo (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete It got a substantive mention in Rock Paper Shotgun. While it got mentions in Softonic, and a preview in RPGFan, these mostly have a purely descriptive feel to them without much opinions. I think it falls short of the bar for actual critical analysis. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melee

AfDs for this article:

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

The article is essentially a dictionary definition followed by an etymology of the word. This kind of content can be added to Wiktionary but Wikipedia itself is not a dictionary. I suggest deletion and moving the DAB page to primary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Military. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This page clearly extends beyond a WP:DICDEF. The terms use in a variety of contexts such as gaming extends its coverage beyond mere etymology. Passes WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 00:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it passes WP:GNG, then please expound on the WP:THREE best sources of significant coverage so that other people in the nomination can see for themselves. I should note that the specific definition of the medieval "melee" tournament is not what this article is actually about. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this isn't a dictionary definition article. Instead, it's a stub article on a tactical warfare concept. SportingFlyer T·C 02:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it is, we have an article on that concept already, close-quarters battle. If you are suggesting that a melee is different than close-quarters battle, you will need to explain how, because the article even admits they are the same. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it is. Simply search "melee combat" and an additional modifier to weed out the computer game books. SportingFlyer T·C 02:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am, unfortunately, drawing a blank on outside the tabletop and video game realm. Rather than saying "wow it's so obvious", it would assist if you explained fully how melee combat is not CQB, or at least is different enough for a separate article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard about close quarters combat until right now, but I could have told you that melee combat was close range medieval combat. SportingFlyer T·C 02:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have found several sources on the form of medieval tournament, but we've got Tournament (medieval)#Melee for that. Furthermore, Melee (tournament) is the former page for that. This page still seems superfluous. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this was previously AfD'd back in 2015 for similar rationales to the nominator. I'd recommend giving it a read to avoid any restated arguments, especially since I'm seeing a few here from both sides already. I'm personally leaning to a deletion, and then having the DAB page made primary, but I'd like to see what extent of coverage the !Keep votes (@4meter4 and @SportingFlyer) are able to turn up before I make a final assessment. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what Magneton is, nor how it might be relevant here. Can you explain? -- mikeblas (talk) 17:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikeblas That's part of my signature, and not an argument I'm making. Apologies for the confusion. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Valid concept. As the article itself points out, a close-quarters battle is not necessarily a melee and the article does not admit they are the same. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete / replace with the disambiguation page. Not notable as a standalone topic separate from the other articles unless there is significant coverage in reliable sources. Nurg (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thing is, there's already Melee (disambiguation). -- mikeblas (talk) 17:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's right – I'm supporting the proposer's suggestion of renamimg Melee (disambiguation) to Melee. Nurg (talk) 00:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as arguments divided betwen Keep and Deleting it and moving a DAB page to this title.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Noting that another relevant article is Hand-to-hand combat, which is essentially close-quarters combat, but without ranged weapons, and more focused on history, although a good part of it currently (emphasis) focuses on unarmed combat. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make disambiguation, which should include Hand-to-hand combat -- a melee appears to usually just mean "a chaotic hand-to-hand combat"; the only stipulation is the hand-to-hand combat article refers to close-range weapons only and not guns, etc. so the Close-quarters battle should also be linked because the phrase "a chaotic melee with guns" is valid. Current content of the article is largely an etymology (a very nice etymology, but it still belongs in a dictionary), and does not need to be merged. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melee#Usage in gaming was merged from Melee (game terminology) and can be moved to ~~Glossary of video game terms~~Tabletop game or a relevant subtopic. Peter James (talk) 15:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The best alternate place for it would probably be Role-playing game terms. I suggested that in the AfD but it did not draw support at the time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Melee combat" is clearly a notable concept - searching Jstor returned thousands of reliable, scholarly sources. The article on close-quarters combat explains how melee combat is a subcategory of CQC that does not include ranged weapons, so I oppose merging there. A merge to Hand-to-hand combat is likely appropriate, but I don't think an AfD that's been open for over a week will result in a consensus for that merge. I advise the nominator to open a merge discussion after this is closed if they would like to explore that option. Toadspike [Talk] 08:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Toadspike. When I search JSTOR for the phrase "Melee combat" I get 29 results. Could you please re-do the search and tell us the exact number you get. Thanks. Nurg (talk) 01:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I searched on "melee" and then selected those in the history category. This gave me 11,766 results. Not all are on melee combat, but there are many there. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:GHITS. For all we know, 11,765 of them are just trivial mentions. This is not a policy-based argument unless actual sources are brought forth. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I didn't use quotes around the term. I've gone back to the Wikipedia Library's EBSCO search to find THREE (actually four) good sources with indisputably significant coverage: [1] and [2] (two similar MEDRS-level sources on stress in melee combat), [3] (the whole article is about women in research on melee combat, but it only says "melee" once, later uses refer to "the topic of discourse" or "the subject of this analysis"), [4] (about the specific use of "melee" to refer to tournaments).

I also see plenty of sources on Roman infantry tactics that mention "melee", including this one that says "Polybius’ battle narratives largely support the notion of melee combat constituting the main stage of infantry combat on the battlefield. Other Greek and Roman historians seem to fit our proposed model as well." and this one this one about melee depicted in classical art. While these don't use the specific word "melee" as much, they show the significance of the concept in classical history.

That said, I would still support a merge to hand-to-hand combat as an ATD. Toadspike [Talk] 09:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike There's definitely some good coverage here regarding melee combat. I'm a bit concerned, though, about the overlap between melee and other types of close quarters combat, since I'm not sure if they're synonyms or acting as two distinct forms of combat in this context, especially since a few of these mention both in the same article, though melee seems to be the one most predominantly used. Would you be willing to clarify on this? Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 15:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far it still seems like the best option is: Move to "melee combat", redirect to hand-to-hand combat as a total WP:OVERLAP, then put the DAB in this place. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only possible challenge with this is melee is also used in descriptions of naval combat, particularly in the pre-steam era. In that context it tends to refer to close-in combat, which isn't always hand to hand. Intothat darkness 19:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Intothatdarkness: Seems like a hatnote situation. "Melee combat redirects here. For close-ranged naval combat, see..." ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. Just trying to avoid tunnel vision on the subject of melee. Too many seem to think these things originate from gaming, when in fact they don't. Intothat darkness 02:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this was already clarified elsewhere but I'll restate it here for @Pokelego999: As I understand it, "melee" is close-quarters combat without ranged weapons, while "close-quarters combat" includes ranged weapons like guns. Thus, I oppose merging "melee" to "close-quarters combat", but I am okay with merging to "hand-to-hand combat". I must also emphasize that I am okay with a merge but strongly oppose redirecting, since Melee includes significant chunks of relevant, well-cited content. Toadspike [Talk] 09:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, melee doesn't always refer to close combat without weapons. Cavalry engagements in the Civil War, for example, have also been described as melees even though both sides were armed with pistols in addition to sabers. Pigeonholing it in hand to hand or as some kind of gaming term risks losing context and in my view is a form of Synth bordering on OR. And CQB (along with close-quarters combat) is a much more modern term. Melee in older usage tends to refer to combat within close distance without formations or much in the way of formal or organized tactics. It isn't limited by weapon types but more by distance and a possible lack of tactical organization. Intothat darkness 19:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. A merge/redirect is not appropriate and would be WP:SYNTH.4meter4 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article admittedly needs some work, but melee is not the same thing as CQB or some of the other concepts proposed above. Intothat darkness 19:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep I feel the subject's independent notability is unclear, but the sourcing and definitions do vary enough to where there isn't clear overlap. This is better discussed editorially where these differences can be resolved without the pressure of an AfD, and for the time being the article should suffice as a standalone subject. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates for discussion