Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of portable computer games

:{{la|List of portable computer games}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of portable computer games}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{findsources|List of portable computer games}})

Would appear to be original research, or WP:HOWTO: "Just copy the program's folder, everything needed to run is in there.", "You will need a NOCD file", "You need to add an install path to the registry", etc. Marasmusine (talk) 12:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. {{#ifeq:|none||([http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009782238053898643791:8naerdbd-oy&q={{urlencode:List of portable computer games}} Search video game sources])}} Marasmusine (talk) 12:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
• Weak Keep I think the concept is important and alist of games makes a fine list article. Aside from that 'WP:How to' events can be easily fixed in this article by removing those lines. The article should have some sources, though to strengthen its verifibility though (some claims id probably disagree with myself pretty much since alot here seems to be original research (hence my weak keep point of view). Ottawa4ever (talk) 12:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

::Ive attempted to address the HOW TO aspect. Might not be enough though will concide that. Ottawa4ever (talk) 12:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Yes, if the entries have been verified for portability through independent sourcing, and not just through successful installations by our editors, then this will be a different matter. Marasmusine (talk) 13:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 02:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• Delete almost all early DOS and many early Windows and Macintosh games did not require installation. Many early PC games even came with their own operating system, which meant rebooting to run the game. In fact early home computers and personal computers didn't even have permanent storage devices like a hard disc. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 07:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• Comment the last AfD on this article resulted in a merge result. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 07:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Very true. But this discussion was about 4 years ago (2006). A discussion on merging was also opened shortly after but was closed shortly after as well. The article at that time also had references for each game if you check the refs and the list looked very different. nethertheless, the merge idea (with valid sourcing) would be acceptable to me (but again if theres nothing sourced, what can you merge? Ottawa4ever (talk) 09:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• Comment/Question. This seems to be a list of MS Windows-only games, where the concept might make sense (as opposed to game consoles, Mac, etc.) Perhaps the issue should be clarified in the article's lead and title. Pcap ping 00:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep this would be a nice list once actually expanded. Nergaal (talk) 05:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per the IP's rationale. If I'm understanding what this list emcompasses, then this would include nearly every early home computer (PC, Macintosh, Commodore, etc.) game made, which would be a tad too indiscriminate IMO. I also don't know if having a "list of lists" would work too well, but if you absolutely positively want to have a list for the sake of having a list, then perhaps that could also be looked into. –MuZemike 20:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
• Delete as this list has no verifiable definition in accordance with WP:Source list, without which it is just a collection of loosely assoicated of topics without any externally validated rationale for inclusion in Wikipedia. A verifable definition is also needed to demonstrate that it is not the product of original research. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 14:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
• Sympathetic Delete -- even though I'm sure gamers might find this useful, it just ends up being an unmaintainable list that could never be verified. --Teancum (talk) 13:08, 24 February 2010 (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.