RuneScape:Requests for deletion/SwiftKit

SwiftKit
Previous VfD: RuneScape:Votes for deletion/SwiftKit/Archive1

I strongly believe this article should be deleted. First of all, this article is little more than a brochure for SwiftKit as it is written. The vast majority of content is information about the product, and not about how it relates to RuneScape. Secondly, it is no longer as helpful as it once was. Most of the features which made it useful have been put into the game proper. Third, and most importantly, SwiftKit is not part of RuneScape nor the Runescape Wiki. Its completely independent and should therefore not be covered in such excruciating detail. Is it "the best"? Completely opinion driven, and that argument has no place in an encyclopedia. Is it the most used? That's impossible to prove.

I am not suggesting that all mention of SwiftKit be irradiated from the Wiki. "SwiftKit" should be redirected to Riot, and more specifically (when the Riot article is cleaned up), the "Rule 7 Protest". But what if someone comes here wanting to learn about SwiftKit, you ask? They type "SwiftKit" in the search box and wind up at the Rule 7 Protest section. If that's not enough, they can google it. Its not our duty to make sure that everyone knows about every program made for RuneScape. If we talk about one, we'd have to talk about them all. If you still vote to keep the actual SwiftKit article, please consider whether the information on the article is really suitable for the Wiki, or whether it should be stripped down to cover only the historical context, without all the "advertisment" stuff.

Merge to Riots - As nom. 03:12, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Support merge Many players have been banned for using SK, since there was a miscommunication between Jagex and Players, there was a Riot. -- 03:15, November 24, 2009 (UTC) (forgot to sign)

Support merge - For reasons Psycho mentioned. 03:18, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Keep - It serves as an important memorabilia of Runescape's very own history, therefore, I do not think it would be wise to remove this article, as it serves a purpose other than for third-party promotion. People should know more about "behind-the-scenes" features of and related to Runescape's background. Many people don't even know what SwiftKit is in the first place. Let there be knowledge. -- 03:20, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - We are voting for a Merge with Riot, not deleting the article.  03:22, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I see no purpose in merging it with the Riot article. It's an individual article entailing individual needs, it's used by the community at large, and there is no rule whatsoever that states that Runescape Wiki cannot contain non-Runescape affiliated information/articles.

I really do hope that the article is kept in its original state, as it's better off staying that way than being merged to a totally irrelevant article such as Riot. I don't see how a riot would have anything to do with SwiftKit, unless you're talking about the Rule 7 Protest, which is insignificant. Besides, the article has already been rewritten several times to adjust to the neutrality concensus policy of Wikia.-- 03:27, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Merge into Riot (edit conflict 3 times in a row...) I predict a massive riot coming the way of this thread. 03:30, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Keep I would like to redirect SwiftKit, not merge it, to Riot, as this would have both benefits of the doubt. -- 03:31, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect means that you want to delete the entire article, replacing it with a redirect to the Riots page. I feel that this is not what you mean. 03:37, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Merge to Riots - For reasons outlined above. Star Find 03:35, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Redirect would be much better than Merge, seeing as how it would still have relevance to the original article. -- 03:47, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Merge to Riots - Just as RS:PDDA covers players, we should not give programs articles as well. Another factor is that it is written without a RS:NPOV. This client does not deserve an article, nor do any other clients/programs/etc. Per Psycho. 03:55, November 24, 2009 (UTC)