Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glider (MMORPG bot)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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. east.718 at 08:18, December 22, 2007

Glider (MMORPG bot)

Totally not notable, similar article also exist (Warden (software)), and should be merged within World of Warcraft since it is part of the game Fangz of Blood 02:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Fangz of Blood 02:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge with World of Warcraft. Seems to pass WP:WEB, being the subject of reliable, independent sources, and the subject of controversy. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 02:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Seems too much like Warden (software) to me.Fangz of Blood 03:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How so? Glider is a WoW bot; Warden is a component of WoW which checks for bots. They're not at all the same thing. Zetawoof_(ζ) 05:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there is a lot of different macro/botting software to be found. While it is true that Glider is the most famous in this one game, i don't see how it is notable, and i can't find any sources saying it is. As for the Warden article: Shouldn't be merged into World of Warcraft as it is not only used there, but in other games as well. Not sure if it is notable for an article though (would have to research first) but i recommend opening a enw AFD for the article. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 10:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Criticism of World of Warcraft, already mentions some of it in passing, would be improved by merge. User:Krator (t c) 13:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glider wouldn't really fit into the Criticism page, as it's not really criticism, it's an unauthorized 3rd party tool. Aaronomus (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into World of Warcraft, clean up and add sources, but try to leave all non-redundant information intact. Notable enough to be on the WoW page. Aaronomus (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article doesn't belong in World of Warcraft. That article is long enough already. As far as notability, it seems the company behind Glider is involved in a lawsuit with blizzard [1]. Cheezerman (talk) 18:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This really doesn't meet WP:OTHERSTUFF and your arguement seems like WP:BHTT, which doesn't fit the case. Fangz of Blood 18:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Your reasons for AfD are totally invalid. Please enlighten us as to how a third-party application is part of World of Warcraft. While you're at it, check out [2] for notability. 62.31.88.36 (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the point you are making, and I do indeed love and play World of Warcraft. You are also missing my reasoning greatly IP #62.31.88.36. That one resource covers the lawsuit greatly, but most of the other topics need similar ones. Fangz of Blood 21:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unless it can assert notability through referencing. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge; what about a general article on WoW third party apps/software (with appropriate redirects)? though i note that there is a section for related software in the WoW thing at the bottom of the page, with other apps listed besides this one. the argument that it is too much like an article about another similar piece of software seems invalid, as they are similar, but not the same & not related in terms of origin & development; at most that would argue in favour of a merge/common article abt WoW apps. this definitely belongs somewhere in wikipedia's WoW material; it is more than sufficiently notable & likely to be of use & interest to people researching the subject here. Why don't we send this whole thing to the user groups dedicated to the subject, & have them sort it out? --Lx 121 (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. No assertion of notability. Failed the verifiable policy (no independent third-party reliable sources are given). Dekisugi (talk) 09:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's widely used by WoW players, & notable enough for the owner-operators of the game to be suing its creators. Who here actually plays WoW? If verifiability is the issue, try googling/google news for it. --Lx 121 (talk) 10:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, the onus is not in the readers side. Try to put the reliable sources in the article and I'll change my opinion. Everybody can always googling, but who knows which one is reliable? And that's what it's called verifiability. Dekisugi (talk) 08:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no sources independent of the company. AnteaterZot (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Dekisugi. Tavix (talk) 17:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' Lawsuit, once its resolved, might be notable, game addin feature isn't Mbisanz (talk) 23:55, 21 December 2007 (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.