Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gameplay of Dragon Quest

Gameplay of Dragon Quest

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is the same scope as Dragon Quest, which already covers the gameplay of the series, including its history and its reception. This takes many of the same sources, and writes a worse article that focuses more on material that violates WP:VGSCOPE and WP:GAMEGUIDE. There is a consensus at the Video Games WikiProject that we shouldn't create this type of WP:REDUNDANTFORK, since there is nothing here that isn't covered at Dragon Quest. I would consider a redirect, but I don't see material that would be suitable for a merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The gameplay itself does not seem to have been widely discussed by reliable sources and therefore fails WP:GNG. I do wonder about our similar article Gameplay of Overwatch, whose gameplay has been discussed at length, but apparently only by gaming magazines and similar sources. Anonymous 17:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest#Gameplay per Pokelego999 Anonymous 18:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest. While I would normally argue delete, deletion removes many viable redirects which are valuable targets. After the recent Gameplay of Pokémon AfD, I had to recreate many redirects that are genuinely useful search targets that got caught in the cross-fire of the article's deletion. Additionally, the redirect helps if anyone is, for some reason, wanting particular information on the Dragon Quest series's gameplay. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest#Gameplay - As stated in the nom, this really does appear to be a redundant fork. Pretty much all of the common elements of the series included in this article are already covered in the franchise article. Likewise, the "Reception" and "Legacy" sections are just discussing the reception and legacy of the franchise as a whole, which is also fully described at the main Dragon Quest article. Rorshacma (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above, was an unnecessary split. Sergecross73 msg me 14:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per WP:NEXIST; the sourcing isn't great, but HG101 and this additional article shows that the gameplay of Dragon Quest is independently notable as something so revolutionary that it essentially minted the JRPG genre. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its impact is already infinitely better conveyed at Dragon Quest#Legacy. No one doubts the impact, just the need for a separate article. Sergecross73 msg me 14:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]