Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GURPS Illuminati University (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Keep per Snow - Non-Admin Closure. Fosnez 13:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

GURPS Illuminati University
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This book of gaming instructions is not much more than a summary of each book’s content, and fails WP:Fiction for want of coverage from reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject; rather an award from a related trade association or link to a fansite are its only claims to fame, but fall short of WP:Notability. --Gavin Collins 01:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep "GURPS Illuminati University won the 1992 Origins Award for Best Roleplaying Supplement.[1]" This qualifies it under the books criteria, even if you don't understand the significance. This is the equivalent of saying a movie that won an oscar isn't significant. Turlo Lomon 01:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong and Speedy Keep. Haven't we done this dance before?  Eh, whatever.  This book won an Origins Award (a major award in it's genre), was a major release by a reputable publisher, and was authored by two rather significant figures, Kaja and Phil Foglio. I think it's about time you learned it's rude to WP:POINT, and turned your attention to endeavors other than GURPS books. --UsaSatsui 01:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Remember to keep your cool, folks. This matter has so far been remarkably civil. --Kizor 03:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. What more can I say that hasn't been said already in these debates?  I do think that the editor is trying to make some WP:POINT, and wish I could figure out what it is.  --Craw-daddy | T | 03:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per above. Although I'm glad someone has made us thin out the GURPS books, it's getting harder and harder to assume good faith - why is he going after the clearly notable GURPS books instead of, say, the D20 ones? Percy Snoodle 06:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per having won a major award. (By the way, what does "This book of gaming instructions is not much more than a summary of each book’s content" mean? Gavin, were you talking of some other book? I would love indeed to see a book containing summaries of "each book" in the world!) --Goochelaar 08:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Possible Answer I noticed that the previous prods linked are not the same as the article being discussed for deletion. Is there some confusion on what book was prodded? Turlo Lomon 08:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep again, per above. An Orgins award winning supplement satisfies notability. Web Warlock 10:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Gavin, Origins isn't "related" unless the Academy (as in Acedemy Awards) is related to every film studio. Origins is independent of the publisher, authord, etc etc. SamBC(talk) 13:31, 14 September 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.