284:. Needs cleanup, but the basic content of the article is less a POV fork of Game Design than a superior (at least from a scholar standpoint) collection of information on the subject. Sources cited are legitimate. Claims made (while obscured to someone outside the industry) are valid. Definitely needs some love, though.
131:. The "literature" section does not suppport the article as third-party sources, other than perhaps as citations for an essay. Again, this would fall under original research. I can't imagine this could be rewritten to comply with Knowledge (XXG) guidelines, as whatever could be saved is already covered in
438:
Abstract from the title. Pretend that the title doesn't exist. Read the content and then read the references. The references support the claims made in the article, namely the interplay between conceptual and instrumental design, the explanation of the scope of "game design" and the discussion of
410:
Those references listed specifically refer to the concept of "Game Design Brief"? If not, then this article is an essay, and therefore original research. If the references listed do specifically mention this concept, and no online versions are available, then the article would need to be extensively
342:
How is it original research? Knowledge (XXG) doesn't require footnote or in text citations for all articles (And only recently required them for FAs). there are a half dozen sources cited that verify the claims made in the article. It isn't original research.
516:
My impression is that the article means to be titled "Game Design Brief" quite literally, describing the document that outlines a game's design from the outset. In this case
Software design document would be a possible broad parent, as would game design.
368:
is again pretty clear on sources. Both of these are WIkipedia policy. The sources provided only provide support as an original essay, not verification for a teriary source of information, such as
Knowledge (XXG).
274:
article in simple factual statements, without the instructions or suggestions. I don't see any reason to have a separate article for subject matter that clearly falls under that category.
120:
193:- For now. I think the article is just kind of poorly-written for an encyclopedia (POV). I'm not a big gamer person, I'd suggest consulting some admin who knows that stuff.
163:
411:
rewritten with excerpts from those texts. At this point the references merely support this as an essay. And if this is something that's already covered in
392:
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying. I am telling you that the sources listed in that article verify the material in the article. This is
590:
per
Protonk. Looks like it has all the elements to be a valid standalone article, just needs referencing and copyediting. Flagged for rescue.
266:- It's too wordy for me to discern if there is anything worth keeping. If there is any salvageable content that's not redundant it should be
87:
82:
91:
476:
is what this article means to talk about. If it gets merged, it should be merged there, as a smerge would be an unambiguous improvement.
74:
54:
17:
203:
614:
439:"state space" in the last section (and others). Like I said in my original keep 'vote', we could move this content to
36:
576:
207:
613:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
599:
582:
553:
549:
526:
507:
503:
495:
485:
473:
456:
433:
405:
387:
352:
337:
317:
293:
258:
237:
212:
184:
152:
56:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
364:
is pretty clear on this, especially in the first paragraph on what original research is. And as for sources,
333:
78:
423:
377:
174:
142:
52:
313:
70:
62:
443:
and the game design article would be improved. This is verifiable, sourced content and we should be
545:
499:
254:
199:
595:
329:
233:
494:
My impression is that the article is mistitled - it means that it is a brief upon Game Design.
522:
481:
452:
416:
401:
370:
348:
289:
167:
135:
49:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
566:
393:
309:
267:
225:
562:
444:
361:
325:
221:
128:
250:
195:
365:
591:
229:
518:
477:
448:
397:
344:
285:
108:
303:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
541:
440:
412:
396:. This article isn't OR just because it is poorly written or poorly formatted.
281:
271:
246:
132:
572:
498:
is not appropriate because it is talking about games, not software.
245:
Definitely looks like original research and somewhat of a fork of
607:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
415:, I fail to see the point for a seperate article at this point.
115:
104:
100:
96:
308:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
617:). No further edits should be made to this page.
164:list of video game related deletion discussions
8:
162:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
565:, lacking any sources to indicate
24:
1:
600:22:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
583:17:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
554:09:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
527:19:02, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
508:09:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
486:08:04, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
457:23:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
434:22:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
406:19:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
388:12:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
353:09:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
338:07:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
318:00:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
294:21:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
259:01:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
238:20:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
213:13:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
185:12:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
153:12:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
57:02:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
634:
447:rather than deleting it.
610:Please do not modify it.
496:Software design document
474:Software design document
32:Please do not modify it.
445:editing to improve it
270:and merged with the
127:This is completely
394:explicitly allowed
44:The result was
320:
268:inline referenced
222:original research
187:
129:original research
71:Game Design Brief
63:Game Design Brief
625:
612:
581:
430:
427:
420:
384:
381:
374:
307:
305:
220:- It looks like
211:
181:
178:
171:
158:
149:
146:
139:
118:
112:
94:
34:
633:
632:
628:
627:
626:
624:
623:
622:
621:
615:deletion review
608:
579:
570:
428:
425:
418:
382:
379:
372:
301:
264:Merge or delete
194:
179:
176:
169:
147:
144:
137:
114:
85:
69:
66:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
631:
629:
620:
619:
603:
602:
585:
575:
556:
546:Colonel Warden
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
511:
510:
500:Colonel Warden
489:
488:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
355:
322:
321:
306:
298:
297:
296:
275:
261:
240:
215:
188:
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
630:
618:
616:
611:
605:
604:
601:
597:
593:
589:
586:
584:
580:
578:
574:
568:
564:
560:
557:
555:
551:
547:
543:
539:
536:
535:
528:
524:
520:
515:
514:
513:
512:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
491:
490:
487:
483:
479:
475:
471:
468:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
437:
436:
435:
432:
431:
422:
421:
414:
409:
408:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
390:
389:
386:
385:
376:
375:
367:
363:
359:
356:
354:
350:
346:
341:
340:
339:
335:
331:
330:StonerDude420
327:
324:
323:
319:
315:
311:
304:
300:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
278:Keep or merge
276:
273:
269:
265:
262:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
241:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:wrapped in a
223:
219:
216:
214:
209:
205:
201:
197:
192:
189:
186:
183:
182:
173:
172:
165:
161:
157:
156:
155:
154:
151:
150:
141:
140:
134:
130:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
53:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
609:
606:
587:
571:
558:
537:
469:
424:
419:freshacconci
417:
378:
373:freshacconci
371:
357:
302:
277:
263:
242:
226:how to guide
217:
190:
175:
170:freshacconci
168:
159:
143:
138:freshacconci
136:
126:
50:Juliancolton
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
542:Game design
472:Apparently
441:Game design
413:Game design
310:Ron Ritzman
282:Game Design
272:Game design
247:Game Design
133:Game design
251:Edward321
191:Weak Keep
592:Jclemens
230:Burzmali
121:View log
567:WP:NOTE
559:Delete:
519:Protonk
478:Protonk
470:Comment
449:Protonk
398:Protonk
358:Comment
345:Protonk
328:Delete
286:Protonk
88:protect
83:history
360:Well,
243:Delete
218:Delete
116:delete
92:delete
577:Stalk
573:Hrafn
563:WP:OR
561:pure
538:Merge
362:WP:OR
326:WP:OR
208:carol
204:chime
200:cheer
196:Ceran
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
596:talk
588:Keep
550:talk
523:talk
504:talk
482:talk
453:talk
429:talk
426:talk
402:talk
383:talk
380:talk
366:WP:V
349:talk
334:talk
314:talk
290:talk
255:talk
234:talk
180:talk
177:talk
160:Note
148:talk
145:talk
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
540:to
280:to
228:.
48:. –
598:)
569:.
552:)
544:.
525:)
506:)
484:)
455:)
404:)
351:)
336:)
316:)
292:)
257:)
249:.
236:)
198:→(
166:.
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
594:(
548:(
521:(
502:(
480:(
451:(
400:(
347:(
332:(
312:(
288:(
253:(
232:(
210:)
206:→
202:→
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.