Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Command & Conquer mods

: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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:19, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

=[[List of Command & Conquer mods]]=

:{{la|List of Command & Conquer mods}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Command_%26_Conquer_mods Stats])

:({{Find sources|List of Command & Conquer mods}})

Just a list of mods with mostly only links to the mod pages themselves and in one instance to a youtube channel. The only mod that has any kind of coverage, Red Alert: A Path Beyond, could simply be merged to the appropriate page rather than having an independent article. Jtrainor (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. ({{find video game sources short|List of Command & Conquer mods|linksearch=}}) • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. 19:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

For my part, I put this together based on a large number of unlikely to be notable pages. I would probably suggest a redirect to the series page, with a merge for RA APB per Jtrainor. --Izno (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Please, delete ASAP!!! It actually can be speedy deleted just for it being unreferenced and not meeting Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. 178.223.124.235 (talk) 19:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
:Lack of references are not what make articles suitable for deletion, but lack of notability, which I think it's safe to say is the case here. --Izno (talk) 20:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSpecialUser ^TSU 00:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I also am for deletion. Also, it seems that everybody agrees the article should be deleted. Lakisan97 (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

: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.