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. I don't quite see what usable content there is to merge, since there's no referenced content at all and mostly unreferenced speculations. Anyone who wants to do this is probably better off starting from scratch; if someone really wants the original text, feel free to ask me on my talk page. T. Canens (talk) 06:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep -volume 2-[edit]

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

This game is not confirmed Kronoskh (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2011 (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) 00:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

merge with Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep there clearly is not enough for an indepedent article yet as the game has not even been completed. The Kingdom hearts article is long so this section can easily be added to the main article.Tetron76 (talk) 15:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge – I think including it in Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep makes perfect sense. –MuZemike 21:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This shouldn't be made at all!!! There is no proof towards a "Volume Two" of Birth By Sleep, so we should delete all of it.--KH1MOVIE (talk) 02:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - or at least merge. But there is no place for this article. --LoЯd ۞pεth 03:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete if it is a hoax, or Merge if it is actually real, and there are sources covering it. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are certainly enough internet sources to suggest that there have been previews and not a hoax.Tetron76 (talk) 13:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since it is covered in sources, then I guess it should go in Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep#Legacy or something. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOOOO. There are NO sources providing that this is a real game. NONE!--KH1MOVIE (talk) 20:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. You already made a statement here. Making another delete !vote will not make it count any more. Also, have you tried looking for sources? There aren't many, but they are there. [1] [2] _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources aren't valid. Those articles were users of those websites writing speculation off of what they saw in the Final Mix version. We need an actual annoucment by Square Enix that the game is real. Otherwise, it's just a hoax.--KH1MOVIE (talk) 00:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, the second source was a reader review. The first one is a paid editor though, and is a reliable source. We shouldn't be saying that "There will be a BBS v2", but "the final mix video shows this information". It doesn't deserve a whole article yet, but the main article should show something about the video. Currently Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep#Final Mix has a short sentence just saying the video exists, but doesn't say anything about it. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 02:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can put a little info about Volume Two in the Final Mix section. But this article gotta go, at least until we get the confirmination.--KH1MOVIE (talk) 20:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is what everybody is agreeing to. Delete means that there is absolutely no reason for this page to exist. Merge means to move the information somewhere else. Redirect means the information already exists somewhere else, and this should point to it. Nobody here is suggesting we Keep the article as it is. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OKAY! You don't have to be a jerk about it. Gawd. Jerk.--KH1MOVIE (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't think I was being a jerk about it. I was just making sure you understood that you knew we were all on your side. Should I have added a smiley face? :3 _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 23:05, 17 March 2011 (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.