Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gameranger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 00:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GameRanger

A hugely overblown article on a non-notable gaming community. Doesn't seem to have any purpose, and is extremely vanity-focused. The "EvilToastHead" pic serves as exhibit A for this. Harro5 06:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Royboycrashfan 07:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC) Keep per rewrite. Royboycrashfan 19:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep and cleanout unverifiable stuff. Winning the Macworld Award in 1999 makes them notable enough for mine if verified. Capitalistroadster 07:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yo homes, i vote we delete harro peace out Haroo is just angry EvillToastHead didn't work for him.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheds (talk • contribs)

"Currently over 200,000 accounts have been registered" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheds (talk • contribs)

  • Keep—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheds (talk • contribs)
  • Keep I've updated the article - could still use improvement but should save the page from deletion. Cedars 08:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 07:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as probably notable, but delete everything, in particular the image, except for the first two paragraphs. Sandstein 07:55, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- this appears notable. - Longhair 08:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. GameRanger passes the proposed notability criteria in the current revision of WP:SOFTWARE as demonstrated by these statistics. Articles here (IMG), here (MacWorld) and here (MacWorld - scroll down to the bottom) demonstrate that it has been featured - as opposed to merely mentioned in passing - in publications with large circulation. I agree that previous revisions were excessive, but the current revision makes the article worth keeping. — digitaleon • talk @ 14:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable. --Terence Ong 15:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Note - I have moved the "Gameranger" page to "GameRanger" which matches the title's format on the GameRanger website. I had not intended to do this until after the nomination was complete but as Royboycrashfan noted the previous version of the article contained spam advertising premium services. The article is continually being reverted to a spam version of the article and so to counter-act such things may need to be semi-protected. If it is semi-protected it should be protected with the right title, hence the move. Cedars 05:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: Quite notable. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep rewrite. —Wrathchild (talk) 13:59, 6 March 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.