Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gatherer

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 no consensus. Have a nice day! fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gatherer

Tagged for speedy without a reason. Is a barely non-speedy since I can determine it's a website. AfD should consider whether it is encyclopedic or not. -Splash^talk 22:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, just a database. Though I would link to it from the main article (and I have). -- Grev 07:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I've expanded this article significantly since it was nominated. It's now a viable stub that asserts the notability of the subject (i.e., Gatherer was the first resource of its kind to be officially offered by the company that makes the game). Sommers 14:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep with prejudice per Sommers. I am a representative of Wizards of the Coast. Stifle 13:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, extremely minor aspect of MTG culture. The link to it in the main article is enough. Andrew Levine 19:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I agree that the topic is pretty minor. (I didn't create the article; I just saw it on AfD and expanded it.) Still, it might be worth merging at least a mention (beyond the link, I mean) into the main Magic: The Gathering article if it gets deleted. –Sommers ^(Talk) 00:42, 11 December 2005 (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.