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. -- Cirt (talk) 16:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elder Scrolls V[edit]

Elder Scrolls V (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics

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

This game has not been confirmed and this article contains nothing but wild speculation. The Elder Scrolls V may not even be the next game that Bethesda Softworks are working on. The claim that an editor overheard someone talking about the game on a plane is not confirmation that the game exists. Please discuss deleting this article or redirecting it to The Elder Scrolls. Klock101 (talk) 15:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • • Keep The game has been confirmed to be in existence. And who said anything about talking about the game on a plane? On a website I initially added on the "External Links" page, it says:

"The same source confirmed, with official game documents in hand, that this will be the chronological sequel to what happened in The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, which is the latest game in the now 16-years-old Elder Scrolls saga and by itself one of the better RPGs for PC and consoles." Pay particular attention to the "with official game documents in hand" clause. Please discuss keeping this article and deleting the redirection to The Elder Scrolls when one searches "Elder Scrolls 5" or "Elder Scrolls V" or any variation of those two.Musicarticles (talk) 08:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not confirmation of the game. The site gives an unnamed "source" and absolutely no evidence of the games existence. This article should not exist until the game has been officially confirmed.Klock101 (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to The Elder Scrolls or Development history of The Elder Scrolls series per Wikipedia:TenPoundHammer's Law: "If you don't even know the name of an upcoming [video game], you probably don't know enough about it to write an article." This is pretty evidently the case here. Nifboy (talk) 19:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The game is indeed confirmed by many sources including gamespot http://www.gamespot.com/news/6284431.html?tag=result%3Btitle%3B0 .it deserves an independent article subject to futuristic updates. thanks Grandia01 (talk)

Merge to The Elder Scrolls: That's not a confirmation. Thats basically what the link above says as well and both are from the same "source." The only people that can confirm this games existence are Bethesda. I agree with Nifboy: Wikipedia:TenPoundHammer's Law: "If you don't even know the name of an upcoming [video game], you probably don't know enough about it to write an article."Klock101 (talk) 14:55, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• this IS a confirmation from gamespot mr genius, read the "bogus or not bogus" line at the end of the article pleaseGrandia01 (talk)

Unless Bethesda say that the game is coming out, it's not confirmation. The "bogus or not bogus" means absolutely nothing as the entire article relies upon one "source" from a different website. It's purely the authors interpretation of what he/she has heard. If you can find word from Bethesda Microsoft that the game is coming out, then it's confirmation. Otherwise, it's pure speculation, no matter how many unnamed sources give "evidence" or how many "bogus or not bogus" you can find. Gamespot can not confirm the game because they are not the developers or creators. Klock101 (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The game has not been confirmed by the developers. Any "evidence" is based on unsubstantiated rumors found in this article from Eurogamer Denmark. TennysonXII (talk) 04:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I personally prefer to wait until Bethesda Softworks makes an official announcement before starting the article. Even though Wikipedia identifies GameSpot as a reliable source, the GameSpot article isn't "strong". But Wikipedia also identifies Eurogamer as a reliable source. The article could be kept, however, it needs to be cut down (maybe maximum 50 words). I dislike the wording in the Wikipedia article; it is saying the game is being developed, but there is no statement by Bethesda Softworks to support this? I am leaning towards Delete.  Davtra  ^(talk) 08:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete When the game is announced, it certainly will then warrant a page, but following with how the pages for the other Elder Scrolls games are named, perhaps we should wait until the game is officially announced so that the full title can become the name of this page - i.e. instead of Elder Scrolls V, it is Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (For example, going on recent speculation, that may not be the name) 174.55.2.138 (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Speculation from reliable sources is still speculation, when official confirmation occurs maybe with a game name the article should be restarted. --Matthewdavies (talk) 06:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to The Elder Scrolls. --Dorsal Axe 12:34, 1 December 2010 (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.