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 as insufficiently notable in its own right. I also note that the only incoming wikilink was for an unrelated game of the same name, suggesting a redirect is not the best course. Feel free to contact me if anyone decides to attempt a larger article where this content may be merged.--Kubigula (talk) 04:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crisis City[edit]

Not notable content. I can't see how there will be references to come for it either. Ged UK (talk) 19:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see anything notable about it. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — lacks of notability. macy^talk 22:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:N. No way will there be any secondary sources on this. --ColorOfSuffering (talk) 22:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NN, WP:OR, WP:RS & WP:V. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Better placed at sonic.wikia.com, which also has it in much more detail. --Izno (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as unoriginal research and verifiable per First pillar as consistent with a specialized encyclopedia on fiction. No reason for outright deletion here as could easily be merged and redirected without deletion in a worst case scenario. Anyway, element of notable series. Also, article was created a mere two days ago, so Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built and Wikipedia:Give an article a chance. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Zero assertion of real world notability from reliable sources. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It is notable to a real world audience as confirmed by reliable sources. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment And where would these sources be? ZappyGun (talk to me)What I've done for Wikipedia 20:46, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - In magazines and strategy guides that cover Sonic the Hedgehog. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; this is little better than Stage 7-2. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What is Stage 7-2? Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - A generic name for a single stage in a video game, about which nothing of consequence can be said. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, then I agree that this article is better. :) Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - No, it's exactly what this is. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        It's a bit more specific. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect. Content here could easily be preserved elsewhere and/or recreated for something like List of states in Sonic the Hedgehog. Ford MF (talk) 22:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Such an article would just be back at AFD in six months time, having developed the same problems. There's basically nothing you can say about the stages as a collective that wouldn't be better organized in the games' articles. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - If you agree that it could be at least organized in the games' articles, then we should merge and redirect without deletion. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - As a list of paragraphs on each stage in each game? No. That nonsense gets deleted all the time. You're saying, "Merge, we must save this!" and the authors of the articles you'd merge it to are pretty much saying, "Fuck no, we're trying to improve these articles, not burden this with this crap." If you merged this into any article, whatever you merged would probably be deleted from the article within a week. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Then keep as a spinoff article or make a larger list as suggested above. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Sure! Go ahead and write that article as soon as you find some reliable sources that aren't themselves the subject to use. We're gonna delete this until then, though, but I'll be happy to undelete for you when you do that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Much easier to just leave the article in mainspace and allow our volunteer editors to make these improvements over time as we do with all articles. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into larger article when there's this little to say, that's appropriate. It is well established that the work itself is a RS for this sort of detail, and also that spinoff articles are acceptable without individual proof of notability for the portion that is conveniently separated. Perhaps suggesting that content of this sort will be pursued wherever found is not really appropriate. DGG (talk) 01:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"It is well established that the work itself is a RS for this sort of detail"

No. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 video game). Verifiable but appears a non-notable and minor concept of a video game. It's a valid search term nonetheless. --PeaceNT (talk) 05:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unoriginal original research. No sources, nothing. There's no article -> delete the page. dorftrottel (talk) 09:07, 11 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.