Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameFAQs


 * 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 k e ep. Obvious bad faith nom, only delete vote is a trolling-only account. There is no way this AfD would have any other result. east. 718 at 20:17, 11/6/2007

GameFAQs
Vanity article, lacks content, and should be merged with CNET. AfD's for GameSpot and TV.com to be considered shortly. --Brokendownchevroletsuburban 19:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable, highly trafficked site. Just because it's part of the CNET article doesn't mean it belongs in the CNET article, just as Wikipedia's article doesn't belong in the Wikimedia Foundation's article. Appropriate assertions (referenced, too) of notability are made. It made it all the way to featured article, for goodness sake - is an AFD at this point really appropriate? — ceejayoz talk  19:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete — firepoet —Preceding comment was added at 19:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC); user's fourth contribution
 * Comment - If this gets deleted, this REALLY says something about our FA process here at WP. My suggestion is to WP:SNOW close this and work it out at the article. It just came off the frickin' front page fer chriss sakes!  spryde |  talk  19:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep &mdash; not only is it far from a "vanity article" nor does it "lack content", it's a featured article that was just on the main page. There are numerous sources attesting to the notability of the subject.  --Haemo 20:09, 6 November 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.