260:. The references provided may be from a source that aren't exactly "third-party", but I doubt that any truly third-party sources would be anywhere near as useful as those from WotC itself for this information. As far as outside notability goes, I'd pretty much have to agree; they don't have notability outside of MTG. However, the content itself is good as far as sourcing goes (assuming we agree that WotC works as a source for the development of their own games). Also, no realistic merge targets exist. Anything you try to merge this into would be too big imediately afterwards; especially the
769:
can be edited? If it looks like a game guide, make it not so. If it's not up to the standard, make it so. Also, just made a link between the article and an orphaned article. If the article in questioned should be removed, then the orphaned article and all other related articles should be removed as well. Futhermore, if all the articles are thusly removed for some pesky differences, then
Knowledge (XXG) simply loses its most foundamental principle: an all encompassing encyclopedia which everybody can edit.
191:, but as was mentioned there, this article goes beyond just describing game effects, but a little into the development history of them. However, I don't think that the Magic keywords have any outside notability. All of the sources are "first-person" ones that were pulled from the Magic website and from the Magic developers.
524:, this is a game guide, and Knowledge (XXG) is not a gameguide. As was stated in the previous AfD discussion: "The bulk of the article requires an understanding of how to play the game, and offers no benefit to readers other than explaining how to interpret rules text on cards in that game. This fundamentally violates
623:. I've said it before and I'll say it again. This is a guide to playing Magic: the Gathering. The bulk of the article requires an understanding of how to play the game, and offers no benefit to readers other than explaining how to interpret rules text on cards in that game. This fundamentally violates
309:
I didn't say this well enough, but I'm pretty sure this is a section that grew large enough to need its own article, or at least can be considered as such. And I don't see why out-of-game notability is required in this case at all, or why references outside of WotC would be; both would be nice, yes,
479:
I went to this article to find out want I needed to know about the history behind a few keywords, namely Sweep and
Banding. If it wasn't for this article, it would have been a nightmare looking through archives. The note that says what set a keyword appears in is good for a game that's over 10 years
286:
I'm not really sure how you're justifying a keep...your argument pretty much supports a delete. WotC is not a third-party source, so it can't be used to establish notability. I admit the article is well done for what it is, but the subject simply isn't worthy of an article in
Knowledge (XXG). As
768:
New to this, don't know all the rules on wikipedia & other wikis, but the article should be kept. The article might not be up to the standards of wikipedia & people are having difference defining the actual role of the article, but isn't this why the article should stay on wikipedia so it
708:
be explained in the text when it is used, there are three cases when it's usually avoided: when stopping midsentence to explain every word would make the article harder to read; when the word was explained in a previous paragraph (this causes problems though when the previous paragraph is in a
725:
then leave wikipedia and navigate through a fanpage, or worse, the official site (it can be daunting). Finally, this goes beyond what it needs to do, by providing context as much as possible for the specific keywords, providing insight to how the game has evolved over time, while a little
115:
110:
105:
314:
without context). The article contains good content not just on the keywords themselves but also information on their development, you admitted that in the nomination. This is useful and encyclopedic stuff as far as I can tell.
699:
as a glossary. It is perfectly encyclopedic (check a real one) to have glossaries of terms for technical subjects in order to aid in comprehension. In fact, we have tons of glossaries already on various subjects over at
100:
673:
Actually, AMIB, several of the entries discuss when the concepts were first introduced, what common language they evolved from, or how they have changed over time (e.g. Protection)... additionally, i see no actual
441:
Multiple published sources = verifiable. Multiple MTG Encyclopedias has to do with the fact that such topics are consistent with our first pillar on being a collection of specialized encyclopedias. Sincerely,
744:
is still under debate, the idea that lists of fictional elements from a notable work are perfectly acceptable as being notable themselves, is a fairly stable consensus - otherwise we would need to delete every
709:
different section and the reader was brought to the non-explanatory paragraph by a redirect); and (in this specific case) when jargon is being used in images. "Game-guide" should be interpreted as
480:
old and still producing new content. I'm not fully versed in
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies, so I don't know if my arguments can be used to support keeping the article or to support deleting it.
143:
138:
462:
I see no reason to reprint the large sections of the comp rules when that stuff is available for free to anyone. Anything that links to this should link directly there. Keep it simple.
147:
130:
235:
176:
407:
264:, as it's already pretty huge. I'm not really oposed to a merge, supposing that any real target can be found, but I highly doubt that that's a workable solution here. --
713:
ance for the game, there is nothing instructional about this article, merely informational. Are we seriously considering that if a reader is interested in learning what
287:
for where to put it, the MtG Wiki seems like a great place, and some of this stuff (along with several other things in several other MtG articles) could be put into a
65:
809:
778:
758:
735:
687:
668:
651:
615:
594:
577:
560:
537:
513:
489:
471:
450:
436:
418:
390:
369:
346:
332:
304:
281:
250:
225:
207:
83:
58:
749:
article out there. I offer up the page in question as both a glossary as per my above post, and also a list of fictional elements from a notable work. -
134:
126:
89:
646:
481:
754:
731:
701:
683:
678:, as in "how-to" use these keyworded abilites - it's like saying a glossary of anatomical terms is teaching someone how to operate. -
17:
662:
444:
412:
291:
article...both of which seem like good ways to spend a 3rd shift coming up. But I agree, no merge is really possible (unless
327:
276:
827:
36:
288:
746:
704:. This is a useful and non-guide addition that can help readers understand some of the jargon. While, yes, jargon
568:- very useful list to people who actually play the game (like me), not even understandable to others who don't. --
378:
403:
292:
826:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
642:
485:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
386:
611:
467:
246:
310:
but not required. Besides, in the absence of all else, it's useful (note that this arguement is only
78:
657:
603:
573:
556:
261:
184:
801:
632:
509:
432:
342:
300:
54:
311:
590:
382:
323:
272:
399:
774:
750:
727:
679:
607:
533:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
741:
551:
territory. Transwikification to the aforementioned MTG wikia would be the best choice here.
463:
365:
242:
624:
548:
525:
188:
656:
There's no reason why in even an extreme worst case scenario we couldn't redirect this to
569:
552:
726:
too-technical sometimes, this can be fixed and is never grounds for out-right deletion. -
198:(or merge if anything is ov value); essentially a glossary that serves as a game guide.
788:
606:. This genuinely useful, but Knowledge (XXG) is not necessarily the right home for it.
547:. I can see how this would be immensely useful to someone, but alas, it stretches into
505:
428:
338:
296:
50:
424:
406:(consistent with a specialized encyclopedia on Magic The Gathering of which there are
586:
316:
265:
220:
203:
770:
529:
164:
499:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
361:
73:
602:, but make sure that a link to its new home is included on the main page for
116:
Articles for deletion/List of Magic: The
Gathering keywords (4th nomination)
111:
Articles for deletion/List of Magic: The
Gathering keywords (3rd nomination)
106:
Articles for deletion/List of Magic: The
Gathering keywords (2nd nomination)
199:
660:
without deleting in order to keep editor's contribs public. Best, --
427:? And what does the MtG Encyclopedia have to do with anything? --
216:
820:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
528:, and has little potential to ever be anything but a guide." --
718:
585:
no need for this level of detail in a general encyclopedia. --
337:
Useful, perhaps. Encyclopedic? I really don't think so. --
627:, and has little potential to ever be anything but a guide.
717:
means after seeing it in the text of a picture on the main
101:
Articles for deletion/List of Magic: The
Gathering keywords
786:
Per the above, is useful information to related articles.
171:
160:
156:
152:
49:
Content available for transwikification on request.
504:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
740:also, in direct response to the nomination, while
219:. It seems that they don't have this page there.--
236:list of Game-related-related deletion discussions
66:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review/Log/2008 April 26
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
830:). No further edits should be made to this page.
183:This is simply a guide to the keywords used in
8:
360:useful on a Magic Wikia. Not wanted here.
234:: This debate has been included in the
98:
215:. Might be useful to transwiki to the
64:Deletion overturned per discussion at
127:List of Magic: The Gathering keywords
90:List of Magic: The Gathering keywords
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
566:Transwiki to Magic Wikia and delete
96:
702:Portal:Contents/List of glossaries
402:(disrciminate and verifiable) and
24:
379:an article that shouldn't exist
289:History of Magic: the Gathering
187:. The last AFD was based upon
1:
747:List of minor characters in X
423:How is this verifiable under
664:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
446:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
414:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
404:Knowledge (XXG):Five pillars
408:multiple published versions
847:
810:20:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
779:20:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
759:17:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
736:17:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
688:17:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
669:01:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
652:23:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
616:20:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
595:18:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
578:15:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
561:14:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
538:07:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
514:07:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
490:11:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
472:07:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
451:16:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
437:16:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
419:16:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
391:08:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
370:03:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
347:01:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
333:01:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
305:00:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
293:Magic: the Gathering Rules
282:23:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
251:23:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
226:22:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
208:18:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
59:06:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
823:Please do not modify it.
84:20:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
631:if anyone wants it. -
95:AfDs for this article:
545:Transwiki then Delete
400:Knowledge (XXG):Lists
68:. The result is now
658:Magic: The Gathering
604:Magic: The Gathering
600:Transwiki and delete
375:Transwiki and delete
358:Transwiki and Delete
185:Magic: the Gathering
721:article, that they
262:MTG article itself
650:
516:
331:
280:
253:
239:
838:
825:
808:
807:
804:
791:
667:
665:
640:
638:
503:
501:
449:
447:
417:
415:
410:. Sincerely, --
377:this spinout of
321:
270:
240:
230:
223:
189:WP:NOT#GAMEGUIDE
174:
168:
150:
45:The result was
34:
846:
845:
841:
840:
839:
837:
836:
835:
834:
828:deletion review
821:
802:
799:
789:
787:
757:
734:
686:
663:
661:
634:
497:
445:
443:
413:
411:
221:
170:
141:
125:
122:
120:
93:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
844:
842:
833:
832:
815:
813:
812:
781:
763:
762:
761:
753:
730:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
682:
618:
597:
580:
563:
541:
540:
518:
517:
502:
494:
493:
492:
482:24.125.236.215
474:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
393:
372:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
254:
228:
210:
181:
180:
121:
119:
118:
113:
108:
103:
97:
94:
92:
87:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
843:
831:
829:
824:
818:
817:
816:
811:
805:
798:
797:
795:
785:
782:
780:
776:
772:
767:
764:
760:
756:
752:
748:
743:
739:
738:
737:
733:
729:
724:
720:
716:
712:
707:
703:
698:
695:
689:
685:
681:
677:
672:
671:
670:
666:
659:
655:
654:
653:
648:
644:
639:
637:
630:
626:
622:
619:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
598:
596:
592:
588:
584:
581:
579:
575:
571:
567:
564:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
543:
542:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
520:
519:
515:
511:
507:
500:
496:
495:
491:
487:
483:
478:
475:
473:
469:
465:
461:
458:
452:
448:
440:
439:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
421:
420:
416:
409:
405:
401:
397:
394:
392:
388:
384:
383:Percy Snoodle
380:
376:
373:
371:
367:
363:
359:
356:
348:
344:
340:
336:
335:
334:
329:
325:
320:
319:
313:
312:to be avoided
308:
307:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
285:
284:
283:
278:
274:
269:
268:
263:
259:
255:
252:
248:
244:
237:
233:
229:
227:
224:
218:
214:
211:
209:
205:
201:
197:
194:
193:
192:
190:
186:
178:
173:
166:
162:
158:
154:
149:
145:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
123:
117:
114:
112:
109:
107:
104:
102:
99:
91:
88:
86:
85:
82:
81:
77:
76:
72:per the DRV.
71:
67:
62:
61:
60:
56:
52:
48:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
822:
819:
814:
793:
792:
783:
765:
751:ΖαππερΝαππερ
728:ΖαππερΝαππερ
722:
714:
710:
705:
696:
680:ΖαππερΝαππερ
675:
635:
628:
625:WP:NOT#GUIDE
620:
608:TallNapoleon
599:
582:
565:
544:
526:WP:NOT#GUIDE
521:
498:
476:
459:
395:
374:
357:
317:
295:is kept). --
266:
257:
231:
212:
195:
182:
79:
74:
70:no consensus
69:
63:
46:
44:
43:
31:
28:
676:instruction
464:IanCheesman
243:Fabrictramp
217:Magic Wikia
755:Alexandria
732:Alexandria
684:Alexandria
570:Roleplayer
553:So Awesome
633:A Man In
629:Transwiki
549:gameguide
506:Sandstein
429:UsaSatsui
339:UsaSatsui
297:UsaSatsui
51:Sandstein
647:past ops
643:conspire
587:Pustefix
328:Contribs
318:lifebaka
277:Contribs
267:lifebaka
222:Lenticel
177:View log
771:Ndhuang
742:WP:FICT
715:Trample
530:Stormie
213:Comment
144:protect
139:history
47:delete.
706:should
621:Delete
583:Delete
522:Delete
460:Delete
362:JuJube
196:Delete
172:delete
148:delete
766:Keep:
636:Bl♟ck
175:) – (
165:views
157:watch
153:links
16:<
803:talk
790:Gary
784:Keep
775:talk
723:must
711:guid
697:Keep
612:talk
591:talk
574:talk
557:talk
534:talk
510:talk
486:talk
477:Keep
468:talk
433:talk
425:WP:V
398:per
396:Keep
387:talk
366:talk
343:talk
324:Talk
301:talk
273:Talk
258:Keep
256:(ec)
247:talk
232:Note
204:talk
161:logs
135:talk
131:edit
55:talk
796:ing
719:MtG
241:--
238:.
200:JJL
80:yan
75:Ark
777:)
645:|
614:)
593:)
576:)
559:)
536:)
512:)
488:)
470:)
442:--
435:)
389:)
381:.
368:)
345:)
326:-
315:--
303:)
275:-
249:)
206:)
163:|
159:|
155:|
151:|
146:|
142:|
137:|
133:|
57:)
806:)
800:(
794:K
773:(
649:)
641:(
610:(
589:(
572:(
555:(
532:(
508:(
484:(
466:(
431:(
385:(
364:(
341:(
330:)
322:(
299:(
279:)
271:(
245:(
202:(
179:)
169:(
167:)
129:(
53:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.