Valve Developer Community:Reasons for speedy deletion

From Valve Developer Community
(Redirected from Reasons for speedy deletion)
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon-message-48px.png
This is the discussion page of Valve Developer Community:Reasons for speedy deletion. To add a comment, use the Edit button near the headline of the appropriate section. To create a new section, you can use the Add topic button at the top of this page.
Comments on talk pages should be signed with "~~~~", which will be converted into your signature and a timestamp.
Breathe-package-generic.png Archives

Half-life_3:_Citadel_Unleashed

Very low-rated (2.4/10 on moddb, 14 votes), low-quality mod that should not be taking up wiki space. The page was created by the mod's own creator, too. Cvoxalury (talk) 10:37, 19 June 2024 (PDT)

Half-Life 2: Genry's Great Escape From City 13

Low-quality mod, shouldn't get a wiki page. --Commando of Booce (talk) 10:44, 19 June 2024 (PDT)

Half-Life 2: Remastered Collection

It's not announced, no media, no Steam page. It's close to vapourware status with only anticipation and expectations thrown around it. Even the cover is unofficial. Cvoxalury (talk) 06:12, 20 June 2024 (PDT)

SiN

Same deal as the Quake III Arena page, irrelevant information to Valve's games or engines. --Commando of Booce (talk) 07:39, 20 June 2024 (PDT)

Socialist Tension

This is an article written in 2022 for an obscure mod which released in 2006 and has not had any notable updates since. Comparing this article to Help:Mod Profiles, this mod isn't widely known and doesn't seem to be relevant to the development community. Links to its ModDB page are also blacklisted, likely because of its title. --Blixibon (talk) 12:11, 20 June 2024 (PDT)

Cyber Diver

I'm still working on documenting this game. Been busy with exams to actually keep researching it. I'm done building the FGD and I'm shifting through taito pages through the wayback machines to have a source for everything. Despite the obscurity of the actual software, it's still a fully moddable source engine game that was licensed by Valve. --NeoExperiences (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2024 (PDT)

L4D series navbox and page

*Series page that I've moved to the Category description.

  • Barebones navbox that's very unlikely to expand in the foreseeble future. Not hard to navigate the 2 items it holds without it.

Left 4 Dead series

Template:L4d games

Template:L4d games/doc

Cvoxalury (talk) 13:08, 25 June 2024 (PDT)

I think the template should be deleted, but I want to hear another opinion on that. As for the page, I don't think that it should be judged by how much content it currently has, but whether it merits a page, which it does. ―Pee (talk) 13:35, 25 June 2024 (PDT)
Fair, plus after I nominated the series page I noticed that it leaves the infobox enty "naked" without a link. Cvoxalury (talk) 13:52, 25 June 2024 (PDT)

Strubium's QtPyHammer

The page on QtPyHammer was previously deleted because it was a stub about an editor without editing capabilities.

This is a fork of that core feature-lacking editor, with 'planned' features including working with brushes and entities. I think deal with it just like the original page... Cvoxalury (talk) 15:04, 26 June 2024 (PDT)

Not to be demanding, but there's a few pages piled above on this page, such as HL2 Citadel Unleashed or Genry's Great Escape. Cvoxalury (talk) 15:47, 27 June 2024 (PDT)

Escape The Depths

Stub page about someone's unfinished mod without media or its own page (Moddb search gives nothing). Cvoxalury (talk) 00:59, 16 July 2024 (PDT)

☑ Resolved. Deleted. Cvoxalury (talk) 09:09, 13 August 2024 (PDT)

Black Mesa: Vision

Same as above, but even less so. Cvoxalury (talk) 01:00, 16 July 2024 (PDT)

☑ Resolved. Deleted. Cvoxalury (talk) 09:10, 13 August 2024 (PDT)

Category:HECU_Collective_mods

And:

Black Mesa: Black Ops

Black Mesa: Azure Sheep

Black Mesa: Blue Shift

As stated in the deletion template, irrelevant to the wiki. All the mod pages are short copy-pasted stubs with links (especially Patreon shouldn't be something VDC should be promoting). Cvoxalury (talk) 02:02, 23 July 2024 (PDT)

P. S. User:Speedvoltage, User:SethTooQuick, User:Pee, User:SirYodaJedi, could we get some verdicts either way on the older requests above?

Black Mesa: Blue Shift

In what way is this irrelevant? This is a mod profile for a Source engine game and these have been allowed for years. See They Hunger They Hunger, Portal: Revolution Portal: Revolution, SMOD. I agree that monetization platforms probably don't have a place here and the pages could certainly use some updating but that's why Gabe gave us the Edit tab. Jofoyo| screm (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2024 (PDT)

The question should be in what way it is relevant. They Hunger and SMOD both have huge historical factor for them to the point it's obvious. Portal Revolution is both a more special case because there aren't many Portal mods and much fewer of them made it on Steam; it also has media coverage from sites like IGN and has its own WP article (prefacing that BMBS also had some media coverage: I'd say sites like PCGamer isn't much, because there are editors there who pluck out any community news regularly just to make an article).
Being allowed here on VDC never meant any mod should have a page here. It's about proving the positive (having relevancy), not needing to prove the negative (that it *doesn't* have relevancy). BMBS is niche and what does it add of value to developers? If it can be shown then it adds enough, and if there's consensus that it does, then sure, the article can stay and be improved upon. Cvoxalury (talk) 02:21, 28 July 2024 (PDT)
Also, nominating for deletion isn't (in my eyes, at least) like throwing shade at a mod (or other subject) or offending it. This isn't saying the mod's irrelevant as a mod (rather, that these two sorts of relevancies are different, one from another). It's calling for attention in the context of the wiki specifically. Cvoxalury (talk) 04:35, 28 July 2024 (PDT)
I think a more accurate delete reason would be that it doesn't fit into the mod profile criteria, but actually, I think this mod in particular might already tick the boxes. There's coverage from other sites, it has 150k+ subscriptions on the Black Mesa workshop, and it's currently one of the top 100 mods on ModDB despite the last page update being one month ago. The only issue at hand here is that it doesn't have much significance to developers alone, aside from being an example of a successful mod for a third party Source engine game that started as a mod. To me, it stands to reason that this article could stay, but I'd like to see other opinions. —Blixibon (talk) 07:44, 28 July 2024 (PDT)
While I see the point that the page may not be of interest to developers, (and I agree to that point my chosen examples were poor given other mods like Portal: Prelude, or Portal Stories: VR which uses Unreal Engine are on the wiki), I think mod profile pages are fundamentally irrelevant to development given their regular use, considering very few even act as a directory to their game specific functions if they even have any. As it stands, I don't think any of these fall under the present deletion rules, nor do I think they fail the mod profile requirements which themselves do not implicitly demand development relevance. While they do mention the "main function of the VDC" is for development, the text goes on to imply there are to be exceptions. I think either more specific guidelines need to be considered and texts clarified, or these pages should be left alone. Otherwise there's quite a bit of housekeeping that needs to be done. Jofoyo| screm (talk) 11:36, 29 July 2024 (PDT)
One thing I want to point out is the page is pointlessly heavy with about 15MB worth of screenshots Nescius (talk) 12:22, 29 July 2024 (PDT)
It's written quite promotionally (see Valve Developer Community:Avoid peacock terms). Wording like "delighted Half-Life fans with release of the magnificent Half-Life remake" isn't wiki format. "This is when we are coming in" and "Our mod" is against the POV guideline (Category:POV cleanup). "those who are not patient for the full release will finally have something to play" is irrelevant wording, if people want to play they'll play if not they won't... if you're saying the page is relevant to development, then it's a drier and more to the point context that is required here.
Pointing at other mods and saying 'housekeeping' needs to be done sounds frankly like almost whataboutism. Saying mod profiles are fundamentally irrelevant can't help BMBS's case, surely. Yet many mods have one or another reason to be here - maybe they're a platform in their own right, or are an example of what modding can achieve. Maybe they're an old stub article that's technically irrelevant, but what's the use in going after old tombstones of long-ceased mods?
The problems of this contemporary article are pointed out, right now. The article I nominated is an article with issues besides what I subjectively judged as lack of relevancy, it'll have those issues until they're fixed regardless of any other pages on any other mods. And relevancy still needs to be agreed upon. If it can be shown that it's a useful resource, if it shows how to make a good mod, if maybe they published tutorials, that'd be a good start. Cvoxalury (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2024 (PDT)
I admit that I didn't take a close look at the article's content when I said it has reason to stay. I still think the subject itself is notable, but now I'm starting to get the impression that this article mainly exists to promote it. Most of the page's content would need to be rewritten from the ground up to fit into the VDC. If the article is rewritten to meet the wiki's guidelines and explain how it's relevant to modders, then there might be a better argument for it, but if that's not feasible, then I agree that it should be deleted. —Blixibon (talk) 15:23, 29 July 2024 (PDT)
Alright, I see the point now that I've had a bit to dwell on and reconsidered motives. I've been looking at this in the wrong light and coming from a more lenient less wiki experienced attitude, and maybe was just a bit frustrated, so apologies there. I agree above with Blix, this is copy-paste from one of the mod release pages and needs to be rewritten to fit wiki standards. I may dedicate some time to rebuild it, if there's no further contest about it's notability and eligibility. In our community we do have a few people showcasing maps they've made on top of Blue Shift and several other mods use our provided assets and are all permissed to do so, so I see it as a useful resource for other potential modders. Especially after the next chapter launches itself containing hundreds of new assets. As for releasing tutorials, that's something I've presently been working on, but it's BMS specific being about newlights and uses a video format. Given my affiliation with HECU C would that be worth including on the page following completion as well? Jofoyo| screm (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2024 (PDT)

Rust Dedicated Server

Literally zero relevance to Valve's games or engines. --Commando of Booce (talk) 22:12, 29 July 2024 (PDT)

<lang prefix>/Counter-Strike 2 Workshop Tools

Marked these for deletion because they are most likely fully machine translated. Made by single user and there is important notice on Counter-Strike 2 Workshop Tools saying " most of the translations are machine translated,"

Retrieved from "https://developer.valvesoftware.com/w/index.php?title=Valve_Developer_Community:Reasons_for_speedy_deletion&oldid=444440"