Talk:BoardGameGeek

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Mid-importance).

Board and table games High‑importance

	Games portal This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Role-playing games Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Archives

1

Removed Content[edit]

Hey, I've been away for a while. So I guess a year ago, most of this article was deleted by a single editor with no discussion on the talk page. Admittedly, there were problems with original research and excessive detail, but I wonder if it was too drastic to reduce the article back to stub status. Surely some of the content on the game rankings, Game of the Year, the BGG community, and the virtual currency of GeekGold is interesting and worth preserving. I would like to hear other editors' thoughts on the matter. --Jcbutler (talk) 17:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like we still need more evidence of notability of the site itself. I can find plenty of passing references to it in news articles, but I have not personally found much solid yet from plain google. However Google scholar turns up some papers that may be helpful:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=boardgamegeek&btnG=

But I believe after that we should move onto the Golden Geek awards. That site itself should be good for confirming what they are, but I guess we want things like this for notability:

https://www.polygon.com/2019/4/4/18295237/best-board-games-2018-golden-geek Slimy asparagus (talk) 07:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]