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The result was Discuss before nomming (withdrawn by nom). Rgoodermote  21:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo DS storage devices[edit]

Nintendo DS storage devices (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

To sum it up, the article lacks any good references, fails NPOV and none of these are really that notable. Rgoodermote  23:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There's a whole lot of devices listed there. I'm sure some of them can at least be verified. The Game Boy Advance flash cartridge in particular has its own article. SharkD (talk) 02:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• comment Well I would vote delete article and merge into various articles. But in general most of those cards do not follow our standards in particular notability. Some cards like the M3 and R4 are notable to some degree. They could simply be moved into the Nintendo DS homebrew main article (which I am debating if we even need..it seems more like a guide to me than an actual article, but that is my opinon) under a new section called whatever anyone wants to call it. I have made a bad move by nomming this without first going to the talk page. But at the time I was not expecting a response and I still don't. Rgoodermote  02:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, moving them to Nintendo DS homebrew might be better if they're relevant to that topic. SharkD (talk) 19:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Question — do you think it would be OK to withdraw the nom and close this AFD so we can propose a merge of this article? MuZemike 20:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Hm, yeah that is a wise idea. Rgoodermote  21:33, 27 January 2009 (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.