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. — Scientizzle 16:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 in video gaming (North America) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article is a content fork and should be redirected to 2008 in video gaming which has been refused by author of article a case of WP:OWN here too I think. So delete as there is already an article covering this topic. BigDunc (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete - I agree with BigDunc. --SkyWalker (talk) 15:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Se also discussion on my talk page, where I note that if we start a system of lists tracking the entry of products into particular markets we risk a flood of trivial lists which are of little encyclopedic value. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete We can't really need separate articles for individual markets, just so different release dates can be dealt with. Pointless content fork, should be covered in the main article. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Article is clearly a content fork, and a redirect would be more appropriate. WilliamH (talk) 16:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - content fork. The creator even states on the talk page he created it to avoid a dispute on the main page. There is a mass lack of consensus for this information and I trust the rest of the editors on the main article to decide in a civil matter if a fork page is actually necessary or not, and it seems they've decided not. Canterbury Tail talk 22:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someoneanother 15:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - it's unnecessary duplication. 2008 in video gaming covers the initial release, while each article shows the breakdown for releases by region and platform. There is a lot of potential for different release dates - with three major regions and four platforms, a game could potentially have 12 different release dates. Creating and managing separate articles for each seems like over duplication. Gazimoff (talk) 18:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It would appear that as per everyone above the article is simply a fork of the main artilce which is duplicating info. It should not need a redirect as it's unlikely that anyone will search for the specific term with North America in brackets. BigHairRef | Talk 19:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per consensus, WP:SNOW. --Sharkface217 03:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Unnecessary duplication. Information should be in 2008 in video gaming. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 20:35, 23 March 2008 (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.