Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fargoth World Building Project


 * 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. Sr13 05:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Fargoth World Building Project
None notable web project. Relies heavily on self-references. One claim of notability in the most recent version of the article (the first was deleted via an uncontested prod and the second as a speedy for an advert) is involvement in intellectual property law, which has apparently only been picked up by rpgworld. Does not appear to meet any WP:WEB guidelines. Shell babelfish 00:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * delete unless improved with reliable sources. If "set up a precedent for the use of... intellectual property throughout the internet" could be verified, that would probably be quite notable. It implies a legal precedent, i.e. a court case, which is what would be notable, but it might be speaking imprecisely. --W.marsh 00:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * delete I apologize. I will rewrite this article later to be correct, and, simply, better. I'm requesting deletion as the article's writer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cronos2546 (talk • contribs).
 * If you really want it deleted, add to the top of the article.  — Travis  talk  02:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, particularly given the above from the author. It feels like a Good Faith effort. The article really does need some context - Why is it notable? There are some WP:STYLE elements that could use a lot of improvement - but that's a style thing, and there are editors who will be happy to assist on that aspect of the article - Once you can tackle the notability issue. The rest can be dealt with - but, unfortunately, WP:NOTE is enough for now. Best, ZZ 02:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEB. The author appears to want it deleted too. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable and fancruft. *drew 15:08, 19 July 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.