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 Speedy Keep ...And I'm basically asking for redirect, not deletion is not a reason to bring an article to AFD. Dusti^SPEAK!! 17:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As an Australian, I wouldn't normally nominate Australian articles for deletion, but I don't see why this fraction of Nintendo has its own article when three more well-known Nintendo fractions - Nintendo of Japan, Nintendo of America and Nintendo of Europe - don't. And I'm basically asking for redirect, not deletion. Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 12:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - per precedent at Nintendo of America --T-rex 14:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep No real reason to delete. I don't see why this should be deleted just because the other regions of Nintendo don't have articles. They could also have article.-- Coasttocoast (talk) 19:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. --Several Times (talk) 20:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: No reason for deletion given. Nintendo of Europe never had an article and Nintendo of Japan and Nintendo of America only had simple one line articles that were written and then redirected over 4 years ago. Therefor, I see no reason to delete this article simply because no one has decided to write an article about the other subsidiaries. DCEdwards¹⁹⁶⁶ 21:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There wasn't an afd template on the article so I added one. DCEdwards¹⁹⁶⁶ 21:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I agree. No reason to delete it. Dream Focus (talk) 23:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: If Nintendo of America has its own article, so should Nintendo Australia. MuZemike (talk) 00:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• It doesn't though, I think that's what the nominator is saying. --Canley (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Bduke (talk) 00:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A surprisingly well-written and well-referenced article. WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST applies here methinks. Articles on Nintendo's US and European subsidiaries should be created using this article as a model.--Canley (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, well written, meets our standards, and not exactly sure what the rationale for deletion is supposed to be. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• Keep, No reason for this to be deleted. I don't see how it violates Wikipedia policy. --SkyWalker (talk) 06:25, 28 June 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.