Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 February 28
The article was deleted under "section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion". However, I feel that this article represents a very significant organization in the realm of video games. This organization produces several reviews, comics, news, blog, and video segments on video games and is a significant contributor to the video game review industry. I request that this page be reinstated so the history can be maintained. While the organization is not as big as other companies, there's no reason that this organization's page can't remain, as it was written in a fair and objective manner. No, I am not the owner of this website. I find it difficult to have "other reliable sources" listed for a somewhat minor website. How often does a website mention another website? If you look at page IGN, almost all of the references are from IGN itself, and not other websites. stealthrabbi (talk) 14:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- temporarily restored for discussion at Deletion Review DGG ( talk ) 23:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Endorse speedy deletion. I don't see any indication of importance in the article to avoid speedy deletion under A7. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Endorse A7 speedy deletion. Article had not even the slightest claim of importance/notability, but it did have every sign of an utterly non-notable website (the webmaster even linked to his high school!), right down to an alexa rank over a million! Nominator freely admits there aren't any reliable sources, so deletion is inevitable anyway. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Endorse speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A7. As Starblind wrote above, no credible claim of this website's importance was made in the article itself. Even here at DRV, no credible assertion of importance has been made; Stealthrabbi's statement that he "feels that this article represents a very significant organization in the realm of video games" is not sufficient. However, it looks like NawlinWiki (the deleting admin) gave the wrong impression when Stealthrabbi brought up the deletion on his talk page, telling him that notability under WP:WEB needs to be shown using reliable sources. I think what NW meant to say is that while the article doesn't have to demonstrate notability to overcome A7, it ultimately could not avoid deletion at WP:AfD without evidence of notability. That's the reality, anyway. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 14:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)