Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Color Computer 1 and 2 Games from Tandy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 for not satisfying WP:LISTN or other generally accepted criteria for keeping a list article. RL0919 (talk) 23:19, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of Color Computer 1 and 2 Games from Tandy[edit]

List of Color Computer 1 and 2 Games from Tandy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

WP:LISTCRUFT Taking Out The Trash (talk) 23:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 23:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep. There are many other lists like it here Template:Video game lists by platform. I had originally modified that template to link to this newly-created list, but that got reverted which makes this list seem more isolated and short of context than it should. This list has more detail, especially per game, than some others on the template. And it's just started. Obviously there were many more games than this that Tandy released. There's room to grow. "Be Bold" in helping it to grow instead of joining a delete pile-on mob. Carney333 (talk) 03:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Don’t attack other editors. Consensus based on policies and guidelines is not a “mob”, and Appeal to pity is not an argument. Dronebogus (talk) 15:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    OK, sorry.
    But look, lists exist. They're not inherently worthy of deletion. Wikipedia: Advantages of a List. Carney333 (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete Listcruft, fails LISTN. This editor initially added redlinked lists to {{Video game lists by platform}} which I reverted as non-notable entries and unnecessary sub-divisions (This tiny platform, having 5-6 separate sublists?). Later they created this one, and when I noticed it was already here at AFD. Presumably they plan to create the rest, which I hope they don't so we can avoid AFDing each. We're also synthesizing multiple topics together. Why a list of both Color Computer 1 and 2? Why only those games from Tandy directly? -- ferret (talk) 23:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    "Why a list of both Color Computer 1 & 2"?
    The two machines are nearly identical for most practical purposes. The key distinction in Color Computers is between the 1 & 2 on one hand, versus the 3 on the other. There are, to my knowledge, no games that are compatible only with the CoCo 2 that are not also compatible with the CoCo 1, providing a sufficient amount of RAM and/or Extended Color BASIC is present. By contrast, no RAM or operating system upgrade can make a CoCo1 or 2 able to run CoCo 3-only software.
    Why only those games from Tandy directly?
    It makes sense to have separate lists for Tandy and non-Tandy games for two reasons.
    1. A major identifier for all Tandy and Radio Shack products is the product's Radio Shack Catalog Number. A change in Cat. No. would signify sometimes subtle changes and updates in products with the same name. But a combined list of Tandy and non-Tandy games would result in large blanks and wasted space because the non-Tandy games would not have a Catalog Number.
    2. Unlike most other platform owners and providers, Tandy attempted to monopolize the CoCo software and hardware accessory market, refusing to sell non-Tandy products in its stores. A significant portion of Color Computer owners likely were never aware of non-Tandy sources of games and other software, because RadioShack stores would not sell them, nor sell magazines like The Rainbow (magazine) that reviewed and advertised those products. The divide between those who were and were not aware was a key fissure in the CoCo community. This distinction between Tandy and third-party products is therefore arguably at least a significant as the distinctions made in other platforms listed here, such as games that use various accessories, or were sold in different areas.
    Carney333 (talk) 00:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I believe this explanation from the creator further illustrates the listcruft/NOTCATALOGUE issue. If we're doing this because of catalogue numbers literally. -- ferret (talk) 00:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Obviously I am not attempting to create a catalog. Please don't react in knee-jerk fashion to that word and mistakenly assume that it is relevant to the rule you mentioned. Carney333 (talk) 00:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The thing to understand about the TRS-80 scene is that Catalog Numbers are routinely used in contexts other than catalog listings. Software and hardware discussions routinely cite them. So please don't react to the word "catalog" in this context as if this video game list is a "catalog". Carney333 (talk) 02:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    As for the platform being "tiny" - it was significant. The platform was not the juggernaut that the Commodore 64 was, but no other platform was. Your perception of its size may be distorted by the small size of this initial list of Tandy games which is by no means comprehensive, reflecting only the very first catalog Radio Shack put out. The list was in infant form. Carney333 (talk) 00:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - it's an unsourced list of a bunch of names with no context or content about them as there's no wiki-links or sourceable prose to describe them. Sergecross73 msg me 01:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What do you mean "unsourced"? There are sources provided. Carney333 (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Most video game lists here don't link to a source for or article about every game. See List of PlayStation minis for example. Carney333 (talk) 02:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Carney333: See WP:WHATABOUTX, you are free to nominate the PS minis list for AfD if you have objections to its existence, but here is not the place to address them, as that page is that page and this page is this page. WeWorkGuest (talk) 03:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    instead of pouncing on an infant list to strangle it in its crib, and gatekeeping with jargon, how about actually doing something constructive and helping to improve the list. The Color Computer is notable, there are many lists of video games by platform which constitutes precedent to not just knee-jerk kill this one Carney333 (talk) 04:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Most info on your list is not sourced, and what is sourced, likely doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards for being a reliable source. All info is supposed to be sourced per WP:V, and pointing out violations at other articles doesn't help defend violations at your article. This is not a "knee jerk" reaction, just a very basic observations. I don't recommend anyone create articles on Wikipedia until they understand our basic guidelines. Sergecross73 msg me 12:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Just about every issue on Wikipedia can be argued on one hand or the other with Wikipedia's own endless rabbit-hole of often-contradictory principles. Thus, how about being reasonable, and taking into account extensive, long-standing de facto precedent? Carney333 (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    "Being able to articulate "common sense" reasons why a change helps the encyclopedia is good, and editors should not ignore those reasons because they don't reference a bunch of shortcut links to official policies. The principle of the rules—to make Wikipedia and its sister projects thrive—is more important than the letter." - WP:UCS
    Tandy Corporation was a major corporation. The TRS-80 platform was a notable one in the 1980s, in both the Color Computer and Model I lineages. Lists exist in Wikipedia and are not inherently deserving of deletion as such. Wikipedia: Advantages of a List A link to a Tandy publication documenting these titles arguably suffices to justify their inclusion in the list. To the extent that is not the case and this list needs to be improved with citations (as I have already done with the list of non-Tandy games), feel free to advocate for such citations, or add them yourself, rather than simply seeking to kill the entire article based on criteria not applied to many other longstanding similar ones. Carney333 (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The problem here is that you don't seem open to even trying to understand how your list is different from other lists you keep referring to. Wikipedia is a great place. But if you're not willing to slow down and learn how the website works, you're just going to burn yourself out. Sergecross73 msg me 17:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I understand the view that the two lists I made break new ground in separating first-party and third-party games. However, that's perhaps not as true as it might seem at first blush. Look again at Template:Video game lists by platform and you'll see that the Microsoft Windows section separates out games provided via the Games on Demand service and the Windows Live platform. The 3DS list separates out games provided via the Nintendo Network and the Virtual Console. And so forth
    Even if my separation of first and third party lists IS somehow new and groundbreaking I think I made a reasonable case for doing that that's just as valid as the case for various other list separations, such as those that focus only an a particular accessory or geographic location and compatibility level.
    Finally, even if the separation is unwarranted, surely a CoCo 1/2 games list is not in and of itself worthy of deletion. So how about this for a suggestion: are you oka with deleting both lists but replacing them with a single similar combined list of CoCo 1 and 2 games regardless of publisher? Carney333 (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - just a mess of unsourced, unlinked and trivial junk. I think I sense SNOW, folks. CPORfan (talk) 02:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC) (Nota bene Blocked sockpuppet of BFDIFan707, see investigation)Reply[reply]
    Scroll down the page and look at the links sourcing the games. Carney333 (talk) 03:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE WeWorkGuest (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I invite you to look at this template and see the many game lists there, some of which have less information per game than this very early beginning list does. Some only just a list of names.
    Template:Video game lists by platform Carney333 (talk) 03:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You are very obviously Wikipedia:BLUDGEONING at this point. Dronebogus (talk) 15:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I responded in substantive fashion to arguably uncivil comment ("a mess of unsourced, unlinked and trivial junk") by pointing out that there were indeed sources for the games. In response to that you accuse me of "bludgeoning"?
    To me that seems like
    • (d) belittling a fellow editor, including the use of judgemental edit summaries or talk-page posts (e.g. "that is the stupidest thing I have ever seen", "snipped crap") - Wikipedia:Civility#Dealing_with_incivility
    How about assuming good faith?
    Is there anything other than simply agreeing with your opinion that you'd accept? How about instead of two lists separated by first vs third party we just have one list of CoCo 1/2 games regardless of publisher? Is that a compromise that's acceptable to you? Carney333 (talk) 21:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak keep, the page has been substantially updated and expanded since my initial RfD vote and comment above (roughly tripled/quadrupled in total byte size from what I recall when I last checked). A quick skim of the references section appears to include additional variety of authors. With that said, I haven’t dove into the sources themselves and reference-examining isn’t my forte, but would hope that at a minimum, others can examine them before pulling the plug on this page. WeWorkGuest (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @WeWorkGuest It appears to be the sourcing is there supporting that various games are clones of games from other platforms, rather than to satisfy all the rest of the details or meet WP:LISTN. The majority are sourced to a fan site. -- ferret (talk) 01:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Ferret: ok thanks for checking, how many of the sources are independent and reliable enough? (I’d assume that fan sites don’t count for such purposes, please confirm). WeWorkGuest (talk) 01:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @WeWorkGuest The bulk are to the same fan site I just removed: Special:Diff/1125819299. Definitely not reliable. Self published fan site. -- ferret (talk) 01:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Most of the rest appear to be ok from a publication view, but they are about individual games, rather than "Color Computer Games as a Set" -- ferret (talk) 01:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete WP:NOTDATA, this is useless to the general reader. Dronebogus (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - no indication that this group of games has been discussed in significant detail as a group Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment A second AFD for the co-list is now open, as the advice and consensus of this AFD apparently was not heeded: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Color Computer 1 and 2 games from third parties. -- ferret (talk) 18:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    If I recall correctly, both lists were started before any attempt was made to list either one for deletion. Carney333 (talk) 21:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You recall wrong. You started the second one after this AFD was well underway. -- ferret (talk) 21:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    OK I stand corrected. Anyway no final or binding decision had been made yet, had it? The question was still being discussed.
    In any case, on the overall issue, what do you think of in effect merging the lists, having a single page of CoCo 1/2 games regardless of whether they are first or third party? Is that a compromise that you could support? Carney333 (talk) 21:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I support the aforementioned list-merging proposal (current page titles can simply be converted to section headers) WeWorkGuest (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep and update or Transwiki. The trash-80 was an important milestone platform 40 years ago, even if it didn't last, and this is a reasonable historical set of software to list... even if it doesn't necessarily fit on Wikipedia in this presentation. It would be a shame to delete this rather than finding an alternative format or platform in which to cover this. Jclemens (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jclemens Actually is seems this is already at, at least partially or perhaps entirely?, at List of software for the TRS-80. -- ferret (talk) 01:25, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[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.