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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of video game collector and limited editions[edit]

List of video game collector and limited editions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

The reason this should be deleted is because there is a lot of outdated stuff and none of them have any ref sources to them and its unlikely considering majority of the games dont have sources due to them being 30 or 20 years old. So I don't see any reason why we should keep this article. NakhlaMan (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 July 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:34, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTCATALOG. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Lists. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:52, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTCATALOGUE and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It's very common for games to receive special editions like this. The article is already due for a size split, yet concurrently is missing a hundreds upon hundreds of entries. Sergecross73 msg me 10:58, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, overly broad and unencyclopedic list. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:05, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all above. -Vipz (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral Reviews for games always include information about the things included with their various editions. A notable aspect to mention in the articles for the games. Sometimes they go into greater detail about these things but never that much to write about. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of computer and video game collector and limited editions (fourth nomination) shows this article was nominated for the 4th time over 15 years ago. Dream Focus 02:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per notcatalog, indiscriminate. It's not a defining feature of games to have a special edition, nor are the special editions of games notable on their own, so it also does not meet WP:LSC. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:53, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm surprised that this article has existed for so long, since as already noted it is such an obvious violation of WP:NOTCATALOG. And on strictly practical issues, I can't imagine why anyone would go to an article like this to access this information rather than to the article for the relevant game.--Martin IIIa (talk) 23:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:IINFO and WP:NOTDIR. Wikipedia just isn't meant for this kind of database style original research. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Very broad and unencyclopedic. I think it violates WP:NOTCATALOGUE and WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and given that it's common for video games to have collector/limited editions, and an uncertain selection criteria, IMO it should be deleted. VickKiang (talk) 04:30, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete even with the exclusion of re-releases and limiting to editions with extra materials or content, WP:LISTCRITERIA are much too broad. Collector and limited editions are promotional tools for the publisher, and items of value for collectors, this matters to a very narrow audience and not encyclopedic — whether or not a game has such special editions matters little for their notablility, fame, or other significance (e.g. technical or artistic merit). Special editions on their own are not independently notable. Fails WP:NLIST, scope is so broad that it is unlikely to be discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources other than as passing mentions, WP:SIGCOV not likely outside of actual directories or databases dedicated to this subject. — 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Violation of WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Potentially missing a fair few video games and is already sizeable. Very broad and, in my opinion, should be deleted. Fats40boy11 (talk) 13:57, 18 July 2022 (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.