Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Gaming World

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus reached, so the article status is defaulted to keep. The final unsigned "delete" vote was disregarded in this decision. Joyous 23:30, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gaming World

Doesn't establish notability. --fvw* 22:38, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)

• Delete. Google link search only shows 514 links into the site (contrast 39,000 for gamezone.com); no evidence of significance. Kelly Martin 22:41, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Google: "gamingw.net" - 30,700 hits / "Gaming World" +gamingw.net - 21,400 hits / "Gaming World" 1,940,000 hits (not all relevant). Seems notable enough, keep and allow for cleanup. GRider\^talk 22:42, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete based on the Google hit evidence and the fact that the article is written like an ad anyway. --Idont Havaname 23:06, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• This site deals with creating games, rather than playing them, which is somewhat interesting. Delete it as an ad anyway. Shimeru 23:18, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete as advertising. Rje 23:51, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable vanity and advertising. DCEdwards1966 04:26, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete - When I Google the domain and click the option for sites that link to it, I get one, yes, only one other site. Searching for mentions of the domain get a lot, but reading through the first bunch of sites just shows that someone from the site has gone around and posted mentions about it on every bleeding publicly accessible site they can find, so it's no wonder they also came over here and made a site about thmeselves. Ad. Vanity. Spam. Linkcruft. Nonnotable. Take your pick. Of course if they ever do become genuinely notable, someone else will make an article about them and it'll be no problem. DreamGuy 05:01, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - As it is a unique website that is based on game CREATION. Allow for cleanup, although the article has already been edited further since initial vote for deletion.
• I've heard of it, so I'll say keep. Andre (talk) 21:31, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete rpg2knet's article went, so why not this one too?

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.