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 Redirect --Bubba hotep 20:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SPANC[edit]

SPANC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Card game that doesn't assert notability. Article is also unsourced. Google turned up a couple of reviews, but they can't be considered reliable. Delete per WP:ATT and WP:N-K@ngie^meep! 23:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WjBscribe 01:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, the game's out there, and as near as I can tell, it's fun, but being out there and fun to play doesn't make it notable. Delete accordingly. --Dennisthe2 02:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or redirect to Steve Jackson Games. It is a real product, and can be described at the company's main page if a separate article is not warranted. FrozenPurpleCube 15:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Much as I love the game, it's no longer in print (according to SJ's website) and obviously didn't make as much as an impact as, say, Illuminati. Cheesy fun while it lasted, but probably not deserving of an entire article that SJ Games and Phil Foglio's own webpages can do better and unfortunately not notable. Delete with a heavy heart. KaynSlamdyke 22:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I don't think every card/board/video game ever deserves an article, or even a mention. And this one looks like it was not one of the most popular of its genre. Brianyoumans 00:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question So, do the folks calling for deletion oppose a redirect to Steve Jackson Games which already has a brief entry about this game? FrozenPurpleCube 14:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Answer - No, a redirect would be fine. My !vote stands, but unless the GFDL forbids it, a delete and redirect would be OK IMHO. --Dennisthe2 15:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there is something about SPANC already in the Steve Jackson article, I have no objection to a redirect. Brianyoumans 20:02, 3 April 2007 (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.