Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All World Final Fantasy

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. Peacent 02:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All World Final Fantasy

All World Final Fantasy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No third-party, non-trivial sources to establish the notability of this website (per WP:N and WP:WEB). hbdragon88 03:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Maxamegalon2000 05:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. It seems like a decent amount of work has been put into this article (although that alone doesn't make an article fabulous). The writing is coherent and gets to the point. Earthere 05:32, 16 June 2007 (UTC)Earthere
• Delete per nom. No effort has been made to show the subject satisfies notability per WP:WEB, no reliable sources cited. And do we honestly need a history of ever "version" the site has existed under? -- Kesh 05:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WEB and WP:V. As for the assertation that the article "gets to the point", I disagree: the whole article is chock-full of nuggets like "AWFF vs X111 vs FFMO - A failed attempt by FFXFan to engage three forums in an online battle on the PC game Unreal Tournament." Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom - Cordless Larry 21:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete — "Well-written" and "time" are not reasons for inclusion. The article doesn't have any media coverage whatsoever, and it doesn't follow the criteria at WP:WEB. *Cremepuff222* 00:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. QuagmireDog 03:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Per previously stated reasons. Fails WP:WEB, WP:RS and WP:V. DarkSaber2k 11:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Lack of secondary sources, independent verifiability. Wickethewok 18:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Devoid of any secondary source establishing its notability. Kariteh 19:06, 19 June 2007 (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.