List of cancelled Nintendo Switch games: Summerslam2022 ( talk ) 19:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Summerslam2022 ( talk ) 19:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - every entry is sourced, so I'm not entirely sure what the complaint is there.  There's also long-standing precedent for "list of cancelled (platform) games" list articles to exist so I find the entire nomination puzzling.  It's also a valid WP:SIZESPLIT because of the massive size of the List of Nintendo Switch games articles, which keeps getting split because it keeps hitting literal size maxes for articles.  Im also confused conceptually how a list of games that will never be commercially released be a catalogue violation?  Sergecross73 msg me 19:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It is well-sourced, it meets LISTN, and the NOTCATALOG part of the nomination makes no sense.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 19:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 20:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete These are games released on other systems that they wanted to release on the Switch, but had problems and decided not to.   You can't list every single game that was released on one system but not ported to all systems, that would be long and pointless.  D r e a m Focus 20:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This is a misrepresentation of what this article is.  It's not "every single game that was released on one system but not ported to all systems".  It's got established and specific inclusion criteria.  It only lists games that have a reliable source that verifies a game was announced for the Switch, but was later cancelled.  Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The references I clicked on are just quoting press releases and making brief mentions that it won't be ported to the Switch as planned.   Is there a single item on the list with significant coverage?  D r e a m Focus 00:27, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:VG/S -approved sources commonly write dedicated articles about game cancellations.  Like Polygon on Midnight Suns or IGN on Final Fantasy 15 or Gamespot on Hypersports .  Sergecross73 msg me 00:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Those are not significant coverage, just quoting game designers or game companies announcing they aren't porting them.   Some articles contain mentions of other things in them, but the content about a game being cancelled for porting to the Switch is not significant.  D r e a m Focus 02:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] They're literally articles dedicated to the subject, with the Switch cancellation making the headline each time.  That's not a passing mention, that's significant coverage.  What is going on here?  We've interacted at AFD for decades at this point now.  You never hold articles to such a insanely high sourcing standard, nor would you tolerate someone trying to pull this on you, so I'm completely confused as to why you've decided to move the goalpost for this particular list.  Sergecross73 msg me 02:20, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I just can't imagine anyone wanting to read this article.   It seems pointless.   If you want to add a sentence or two to the game articles as to why they weren't ported to the Switch, that might make sense.   Does it matter if any games were announced then canceled, or just not planned to begin with?   Should we have a list of games that were ported to every other modern port other than Nintendo Switch because of its limitations or other reasons?   Not all companies release a press statement for something like this since its pointless.   Web only news sources have to fill content so sometimes a few sentence announcement and make it into a very short article, doesn't really count as significant coverage.  D r e a m Focus 20:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] None of that is a valid deletion rationale.  That's one giant WP:IDONTLIKEIT violation.  We don't delete things just because someone personally doesn't find it of interest.  I was recently bored out of my mind reading the stag beetle article.  That doesn't give me a valid AFD nomination.  Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Nintendo Switch games Don't really see a reason this has to be standalone.  Surely cancelled games can also be featured under the overall game list, but marked as cancelled rather than having a release date.  Having a list solely for cancelled games feels like an airing of grievances from angered Switch owners.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 20:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The list of Switch games has already been WP:SIZESPLIT five times over, and is already headed for more.  I also wrote all the "notes", and it was not from a place of grievance, but from a place of fascination in the video game development process.  There's no negatively there (if it comes off that way, please, anyone tweak it, that was not the intent.) Sergecross73 msg me 21:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well, there are lists on Wikipedia that are literally just single letters such as Index of Windows games so I still don't see the problem.  If it merits it, the list of Switch games can be split along the same lines.  I don't really see where the game development angle comes in though, because most of them have barely any insight into any special reason for cancellation besides "it was too hard" or "it wasn't profitable".  100% cancelled games often have interesting insight into "what could have been" but these are just ports of otherwise released games.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 22:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You "don't see a problem" with SIZESPLITing 26 unsourced Windows games lists but do have a problem with splitting out one game list that entails sourced commentary for every entry?  I'm struggling to follow your philosophy on lists here...  Sergecross73 msg me 22:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm entirely befuddled by the notion that it's a problem that this list of cancelled games is limited to only games cancelled for budget issues and games cancelled for technical issues.  Should there be games cancelled for political issues?  Games cancelled for fun?  The only third thing I could think of would be games moved from Switch to the next platform, but obviously, that's not something that could exist at the moment.  Unless you're taking issue with the existence of all list of cancelled video games, I don't see what the issue is.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 22:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I was puzzled by that too.  "Difficulties in programming" and "difficulties in budget" are some of the most relevant and important aspects in the gaming making industry.  And it's a list, so it's not like it's the place to write up a full multi-paragraph detailed account of things.  Sergecross73 msg me 22:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep All games are sourced, and it meets LISTN.  I see no reason to delete this list.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 21:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  It does not have "few" sources, it has as many sources as is necessary for the size of the list.  Merging is also not viable, as the list of Nintendo Switch games is already large as it is.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 22:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Every entry sourced, NOTCATALOG doesn't apply here.  -- Mika1h ( talk ) 17:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep ; Not seeing why this was nominated?  The article is sourced and the article servers a purpose.  How does NOTCATALOG apply here?  Negative MP1 18:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Subject has good enough sourcing and passes WP:LISTN as a result.  User:Let'srun 21:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as others have explained.  It's well-sourced – I have no idea what the nominator meant by "hardly any sources" – and the only other arguments for deletion presented thus far seem to amount to WP:IDONTLIKEIT .  - Revolutionary girl euclid ( talk ) 19:58, 4 September 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep