Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pac-Girl

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 to Pac-Man clones. Non-admin close. Jfire (talk) 04:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pac-Girl

This is not notable enough to warrant its own article. I have included a bit about it on the Pac-Man clones page so it is not lost to Wikipedia. Furthermore, it is completely unsourced and a google search turns up no historical information on the game that I can see. Hazillow (talk) 22:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Couldn't find anything asserting notability either. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 22:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge with Pac-Man clones. It exists. That's about all that can be said about it. It doesn't need it's own article to say it, though. DarkAudit (talk) 23:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a bit on this game on the Pac-Man clones article (about as much that is useful).--Hazillow (talk) 23:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and ~~Merge~~Redirect^{KiloByte (talk) 21:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)} ~~(the latter already done)~~. KiloByte (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pac-Man clones as a clearly plausible search term. Not to mention that the nom says it's already been merged, so we need to preserve the history. cab (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Do we need to mention Redirect explicitely? I rarely edit Wikipedia, but I believe that "delete" doesn't preclude having a redirect. There's no real history to preserve, the article doesn't deserve to exist in its present (and any other I can think of) form other than the single sentence in Pac-Man clones, yet deleted articles for a valid topic should leave redirects behind them. KiloByte (talk) 00:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pac-Man clones. Delete and Merge is a GFDL violation. according to the main Afd page. --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pac-Man clones, as it probably presents the reader with more useful information than a stub with a "See Also" link.Gazimoff (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect, though very slightly inclined to redirect Redirect, just in case; more space is used with userpages from users that just edited their userpage and then made no other edits than with this article's preserved history. Though, on the other hand, (as noted above) there isn't much to preserve. ♠TomasBat 19:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pac-Man clones, where the information has already been included. This is not notable in itself, but does make for an interesting note in the latter article. --Sturm 10:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pac-Man clones, per all of the above. Fusion mix 17:58, 27 February 2008 (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.