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 Merge and redirect. Actually, Heli Attack at the time of closing is a redirect with (almost) zero history, so I will first move the page there, and then merge and redirect. This solution removes the objections about the name of the redirect and at the same time preserves the edit history.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heli Attack (series)

[edit]

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

Not notable as a series - only the third one has coverage. See WP:NOTINHERITED. Note also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heli Attack 2. Ansh666 20:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 23:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Three flash games where only one is notable. The other games should redirect to Heli Attack 3 where the series can be briefly explained. Beerest355 Talk 14:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Heli Attack 3, the only one of the three articles meeting the recommendations of the notability essay concerning video games. Miniapolis 01:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose a redirect as the title is unlikely. Rather, Heli Attack should just be retargeted to the third installment. Beerest355 Talk 01:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, that's why I nominated for deletion - redirect is useless with the disambig in the title. I'd like a merge to Heli Attack 3, but think this page should still be deleted. Ansh666 04:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Except that would make the merged content WP:COPYVIO. No matter how unlikely the redirect, if content from a page is merged the original page, as a redirect, must be retained per Wikipedia's attribution requirements. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Actually not so. It is obviously correct that we need to retain an audit trail for attribution purposes. However, this does not necessarily man that there needs to be a redirect. Moving the article to a sub-page of Talk:Heli Attack 3, and linking from that talk page, would also work just as well. I acknowledge, though, that creating a redirect is a simpler procedure! The Whispering Wind (talk) 22:52, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete Merge and redirect to Heli Attack 3 as the simplest way of preserving attribution. The series fails WP:GNG nor does it meet the recommendations in the essay Wikipedia:NVG as indicating notability. The Whispering Wind (talk) 00:40, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Heli Attack 3 per Miniapolis. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:03, 15 August 2013 (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.