- 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 no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 22:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a strategy guide and thus falls under WP:NOT please note I'm not saying Magic is not notable which it clearly is but the fact that this article is a strategy guide. Whispering(talk/c) 16:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Nintendo Entertainment System. The "control deck" was what the main hardware unit was called in the US. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Where's the strategy guide or "manual" that you are talking about? And why should it be redirected to Nintendo Entertainment System which is of no relevance to the article? The control deck article does not include any step-by-step instructions for how to play or build any given control deck, it merely outlines how both historical and modern control decks work, and gives examples of basic functional elements of the most popular control decks. And besides, the other magic the gathering deck archetypes already have their own existing articles. --130.233.16.188 23:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and if the gathering deck archetypes have articles, delete them also. Dlyons493 Talk 00:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. As the anon points out, this is in line with the other four types listed at Magic: The Gathering deck types. The lack of sourcing is troublesome, but this article manages to stick to a description of the topic without prescriptive (how-to) content. Zetawoof(ζ) 05:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Though I contributed much of the content, I see extreme similarities between Magic: The Gathering deck types + subarticles and Chess strategy and tactics + subarticles. I believe WP:NOT applies more to U/G Madness and Secret Force, but not Midgame deck or Aggro-Control deck. NorrYtt 19:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I agree with Norytt, this is not a strategy guide but a description of an existing phenomenon. --Akhonji 17:59, 12 August 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.