Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon attacks 2

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 of the debate was delete. W.marsh 01:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pokémon attacks

This is a wholly unencyclopedic game-guide article that...well, let me reprise my comments from the last AFD (nine months ago):

We have an excellent place for descriptions of common or signature Pokémon attacks: in the articles for the individual Pokémon involved. The fact remains that there aren't many (none that I can think of) common Pokémon attacks that aren't plainly obvious, and the uncommon ones don't bear mentioning (for the same reason that List of Pokémon characters doesn't include every single Pokémon trainer in the games; there are hundreds and most are more-or-less interchangable). Anyone with a basic grasp of English or a dictionary understands that Flamethrower is going to be a blast of flame, Water Gun is going to be a jet of water, and that Thunderbolt is going to be a blast of electricity.

As for attacks that aren't as obvious, in both the manga and the anime (where the effects of the attack are extremely fluid, depending on the needs of the plot) they are immediately explained, in all but the oldest games they're described in the game, and, most importantly, it's exceedingly unlikely anyone without access to those primary sources will ever have cause to look up further information on Wikipedia (unless that information was specific in a technical way, a la GameFAQs, which isn't Wikipedia's thing anyway).

This article serves no encyclopedic purpose, and each major revision only adds more game-guide-style detail (such as specific accuracy/damage, specific chances of inflicting a status effect, etc.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. I wish someone would open a game guide wiki, so we wouldnt have to deal with this stuff Bwithh 23:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There's StrategyWiki, Encyclopedia Gamia, or GameInfo. We even have a template for suggesting that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What about Wikibooks? Freddie _Message? 23:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Jimbo said no game stuff. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 03:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Wikipedia is not a strategy guide. --Coredesat 23:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We99 23:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as listcruft. Any "attacks" held by individual pokemon can be put on their pages.--Jersey Devil 00:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. --Metropolitan90 03:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely keep - What different is this list than any other lists? It doesn't need to be super-specific like most lists... and besides, there's wikibooks. If this gets removed then we'll have lost more good information. And for god's sake it's not "cruft" unless all these status effects get added on, which I never really liked in the first place, what's with this? I'd appreciate it if someone brought this up with me. Toastypk 03:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. BryanG^(talk) 04:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pokécruft. Jammo (SM247) 06:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pokécruft, gotta catch it all. -- GWO
Delete per all above. Anonymous__Anonymous 09:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Anand 21:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wikibooks or one of the other Wikis listed above. It doesn't have to be deleted, and I found it (somewhat) useful. Fr e ddie _Message? 23:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It is inappropriate to discuss attacks in Pokémon articles, as not every attack is a signature attack of some Pokémon, and some Pokémon have the same signature attacks. Many things which may be “plainly obvious” to you will not be to the average wiki reader( as is always mentioned in Pokémon FA noms. While minor trainers may be interchangeable, I challenge you to have your attacks randomly replaced with different ones in battle and say it makes no difference. I think there is a place in Wikipedia for nontechnical descriptions and lists of attacks. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 03:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Serebii has that stuff already. Wikipedia's not a place for it. The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 08:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Theres no need to have an article which is a list of Pokémon attacks, there are many other sites for that kind of stuff. Poke Master (Talk • Contribs) 11:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to a gaming Wiki, this doesn't really belong here, but It might be useful on a Gaming Wiki.--A c1983fan (talk • contribs) 13:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Nobleeagle (Talk) 03:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; info is now available on GameInfo, having the info here no longer necessary smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 14:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC) Weak keep; it is useful for linking from other articles and prevents duplicated information: as maybe 250-300 Pokémon share the move Tackle, having a list is more convenient, and the info were to change with a new game, wouldn't require the changing of 300 pages. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What possible encyclopedic (non-game-guide, non-appearances-list) can you say about Tackle? It's a tackle. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:I just made a copy of this and put it on Gameinfo.--A c1983fan (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:Although this is not intended to be a strategy guide to the game, a cross-reference to any attacks/moves that are listed in other articles, eg. the signature moves, are probably best kept in a section for the moves. Do we really want (probably) different descriptions of a given move that is particular to certain Pokémon? For example, (and I paraphrase here): "Growlithe are difficult to catch ... because of their Roar ability"... ok, so what is Roar? And, with so many other Pokémon also having Roar, is a page on one specific Pokémon (in this case Growlithe) necessarily the appropriate place to discuss such an attack available to several different Pokémon? Of course, this is not the place for detailed stats such as accuracy, damage, etc., but a general description of each attack, written in a prosaic style to match the rest of Wikipedia, may be in order. Kain 00:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WikidSmaht, H ig hway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 15:24, 28 June 2006 (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.