Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SC4EVER

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 delete. --Coredesat 02:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SC4EVER

SC4EVER (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

Non-notable, unverified SimCity fansite. Fails the WP:WEB guideline as the website hasn't been "subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself" or "won a well known and independent award, either from a publication or organisation". Alexa ranking of 801, 708 and only 537 Google results.--TBCΦtalk? 00:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, non-notable. -- Renesis (talk) 00:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable fansite. DoomsDay349 00:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn fansite. Lankiveil 00:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC).
• Merge into SimCity 4: I remember hearing something that this site was related to an employee getting hired by Maxis. It may have been non-independent though. TTV (MyTV|PolygonZ|Green Valley) 00:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. IMHO, only directly related articles schould be merged into a page and not articles on fansites, regardless of who created it.--TBCΦtalk? 00:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MER-C 02:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Oppose merge per TBC and also becuse "I remember hearing something..." isn't a standard for encyclopedic verifiability. JChap2007 03:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. NN and a fansite.--Kf4bdy ^{talk contribs} 03:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It reflects an attempt to be well-written and sourced, but it fails notability. Black-Velvet 05:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per BV. Khoikhoi 05:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:WEB criteria, non-notable. --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 06:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. and oppose merge per TBC SkierRMH 06:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom �he Bread 06:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. JIP | Talk 06:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom -- Whpq 12:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - fails WP:WEB. Ale_Jrb^talk 15:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fansites aren't inherently notable, especially with such a low Alexa rating. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 18:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. P.B. Pilhet / Talk 19:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Nehwyn 21:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Ah, this brings back fond memories of SimCity. But without independent sources, fansites are not notable.-- danntm ^T _C 22:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, per nom and others.--^ॐ Seadog ^ॐ 23:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable. At the very best this could be merged into the SimCity article. Yuser31415 ^{talk|contribs} 23:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into Sim City 4. Atlantis Hawk 23:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. —The Great Llama ^talk 00:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and do not merge. --- RockMFR 06:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. PresN 16:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete - Longest running fansite does not automaticaly confer notability. The Kinslayer 16:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

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.