Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PC Master Race

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Blake (talk | contribs) at 20:55, 3 September 2014 (→‎PC Master Race). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

PC Master Race (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Though the term is fairly widely used I can't find any reliable coverage of the term or its importance. There may be a place for discussing the benefits of PC gaming, but I don't think this is it. Sam Walton (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Sam Walton (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Although the PC Master Race started as satire it has become much more than that. It is a reliable source of information. PC gaming has been overshadowed during the last years based on misconceptions and false information. Unfortunately we, as PC gamers do not have large companies like Microsoft and Sony to spend millions on marketing and 'getting the word out'. This is a legitimate move that is aimed to fix this. Potential users/gamers can find information that will help them make more informed decisions. It has grown insanely popular and has provided information on the subject to a lot of new/potential users. Let's not be fooled by the satirical name, this is something serious an useful! Soupias (talk) 18:28, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The ideology is fairly new and therefor sources must be given a fair shake. Sources can not be expected to come from normally reputable places as the article is culture based and, again, fairly new. It fits just as well as any other ideology and has the following and devotion normally attributed with such. As well WP:NEO does not work with this entry as the reason for the entry's creation is to give overall consensuses to the view provided not to increase its' use. Lord_Anorak 10:55, 2 September 2014
  • Keep This is not a neologism. I am officially in favor of keeping it, even if it means leaving up the citation and incomplete notice until all the correct sources are gathered. This term is real, this term is popularly used, and this term is notable. This is a brand new article, and it already has a very nice selection of sources (some of which arrived after the nomination for deletion). Give this article a chance to obtain sources and it'll be indisputably notable soon enough. As for the claim of it being a neologism, it most certainly isn't. This term is part of gaming pop culture and has been for several years. There are plenty of sources now in place that back this all up, and likely many more to come.Wikinium (talk) 23:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't give notability opinions anymore, but these sources are not used: Escapist (I can't remember; is this the blacklisted one, or is that The Guardian?), Kotaku, Pulp365. Tezero (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Escapist article is written by the guy who coined the term FYI. Sam Walton (talk) 16:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can understand if writing out the reasoning for each point in the ideology seems out of place - as maybe this isn't the place for justifying PC gaming. But I do believe that the term deserves a page. It's already used by - at the very least - hundreds of thousands, more likely millions. It doesn't need a page to increase use. But simply having a Wikipedia page rather than just "Know your meme" being in the Google results would, in my opinion, be an improvement. Teaearlgraycold (talk) 17:21, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Reading those, I can definitely see that this term/ideology is documented enough to have its own page. I understand the concerns and fear of vandalism, but I created this article in good faith. There are a lot of people out there who would love to see this article deleted due to disagreement, but if we can put one together that well-cited enough, it will be safe from vandalism via the opposing voices. This term is real, and it's everywhere. It's just not covered extremely well by reporters, Kutaku and a handful of others have written on it though (it appears). I vote against deletion, although there's a lot of unneeded stuff on the page right now (there's even an article on mods). Wikinium (talk) 18:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I also want to further explain the article. It's not intended to be a neologism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary#NEO. There are people that are generally curious about the term, and this article could help explain that right off the bat. Creating a small article about a term as massive as 'PC Master Race' really wouldn't even make a dent in its usage. This term is indeed popular (as seen by the 200k users of the subreddit alone). I hope this helps clarify for those who suspect it to be a neologism.Wikinium (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to... somewhere? I was going to say console wars but that seems to have been deleted. Maybe PC game? It deserves a section of a larger article at best. If you deign to give it its own article, internet mouthbreathers will make it balloon to a 300kb monstrosity of every instance of a PC game being better than a console version AND all the times they've been "screwed by the Man" with their PC ports. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:02, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I understand the concerns, if there are enough sources to back up the fact that this term, and/or group of people(the subreddit) are notable, I think it would be a neat article. If the use of the term is incorrect, maybe the article could be renamed to "PC gaming superiorority" or something similar. Blake (Talk·Edits) 03:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's the entire idea with neologisms. There of course will be sources that mention it, but if it is not widely adopted across the industry, it's a niche aspect. --MASEM (t) 15:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • That is why I propose making the article not about the word itself, but the group of people it represents. Although, there would still have to be articles describing why they are notable as a group. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:55, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • For what it's worth, at the Midwest Game Developers' Conference (I think that's what it was called?) this past summer, a speaker who'd worked on numerous notable games (like one of the Far Crys, IIRC) unironically used the phrase "PC master race" as an interjection. It was hard to sit still after that, but surely that shows something. Tezero (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This is a legitimate usage of a widespread term and it should be an article that is kept. 81.108.161.238 (talk) 17:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Console players need to learn PC superiority. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenofnine24 (talkcontribs) 17:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Same as above, plus this is a legitimate term. Sulphuric Glue (talk) 17:24, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It has nothing to do with discussing benefits of PC or not. The Wikipedia page is for those, who want to learn about the term in the first place.
  • Keep - Been using this term for a long time, a quick Google search shows many, many, many, many, many results dating back to 2008. MajorDesync (talk) 17:28, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - FYI: The above, along with assumed further keeps, originate from this reddit thread. Sam Walton (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Common term to describe an idology — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.226.41 (talk) 17:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]