Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canon Sims Characters

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. ff m 12:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Canon Sims Characters

This is a list of "characters" that do not establish independent notability from the Sims series. They are not really characters, but rather generic "units" given names and very basic details in order to make the games not feel entirely empty when they are loaded up. The games themselves have no actual storylines and the characters can be deleted and replaced in five minutes. They don't require any coverage in the main articles, so they definitely don't need a separate list. TTN (talk) 23:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. TTN (talk) 00:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As TTN said, none of these characters are involved in an epic storyline of any sort, and virtually any kind of backstory that they do have merely exists in the family bios which are rarely longer than a couple of four-sentence pages. —C. Raleigh (talk) 10:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The game works without ever playing these characters. Plus, if you do play these characters, you can theoretically change their entire "background" in five minutes of gameplay. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article consists entirely of in-game information lacking independent notability. This is a sort of gameguide of premade character templates. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete while notability can surely be argued as has in the past, the fact is that this is nothing but plot summaries and indiscriminate information. MuZemike (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has indeed been argued in the past, the list of characters in a notable game is not a plot summary, and is not indiscriminate. Nor is it sufficient to play the game, so it isn't a game guide. Whether the game can be played without them is hardly relevant (except of course to show that this are not a game guide), and if they are generic, that would seem to be all the more reason for an article. They definitely don't require an article each, and a list is the way to deal with them, as usual.. DGG (talk) 20:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point, but I think the debate is that while the game is notable, the pre-made characters inside it are not notable by themselves. Think of it this way: would someone who was less familiar with the game read an article to better understand the characters? —C. Raleigh (talk) 21:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I too have used the WP:PLOT shorthand in the context of games, but stopped because its applicability is not always clear. The related guideline specific to the context of video games is WP:VGSCOPE item 5. The former is a well established policy, and the latter is an implementing guideline which quite evidently has a weaker consensus. ~ Ningauble (talk) 00:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect to a list of Sims Characters. I agree that this particular article in its current form doesn't really work; however, a list of Sims characters if it includes only those characters that come with the game (and have impact on the metastory that seems to run through the series (the family trees between "The Sims" and "The Sims2" and such)... so not every family in the familybin or player created characters) could be a reasonable encyclopedic article. Jasynnash2 (talk) 10:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't the Sims characters you'd like to see, already included in this list (I wouldn't know, since this list doesn't list the characters of the Strangetown neighborhood which I always play)? And does Sims really have a "meta story"? (I'd argue The Sims has no more meta story than a bucket of paint that says "you can paint your room red, here, have a brush".) – sgeureka ^t•c 11:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Precisely because this list doesn't include Strangetown, Desiderata Valley, and other neighbourhood's "canon" Sims. Yes on the "megastory" though most definitely not as fully details as some games. An example (though possibly not 100% accurate as I don't actually have the game in front of me) would be the relationships that exist between some families and the fact that the Goth's have grown up with Bella disappearing at some point between games. My understanding and meaning in this case of Metastory is sort of how the world has "evolved" without the interaction of a player (although not as extensive as the "metastory" between Knights of the Old Republic and Knights of the Old Republic 2 I see it in a similar vein). Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing WP:N due to a lack of coverage in reliable third party sources. In fact, they might even have a lack of coverage in primary sources considering how thin these characters are: where they live, who they're related to, what they wear, and what skills they have. According to WP:GAMECRUFT, we don't just list every darn aspect of a character. Wikipedia is not the place to find out what characters wear or where they live. Randomran (talk) 17:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is not a game with a narrative. It's a game with a series of background pre-made characters about which one can say little, unless you include fan speculation (which is the bulk of this article). No, no, no, no. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:23, 16 September 2008 (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.