Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameFAQs (0th nomination)

The result of the debate was keep [added by Andre🚐 22:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC) for afdstats]

GameFAQs
Not worthy of encyclopaedic mention. If GameFAQs were to have its own article, so should every other website ranked in the top 1000 on Alexa. Or, at least Gamewinners, CheatCodeCentral, and 1up.com, and many of the other pioneer gaming sites. Yet I don't see that this is the case.

Also, much of the article's content is understandable only to visitors of the site (see Discussion for further evidence of this). Much of the information, in particular the paragraphs about spinoffs, etc., the history of the site, are irrelevant to Wikipedia's purpose as a body of human knowledge and should be discarded.

Markl222 21:00 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Voting against.. If you think every other top 1000 site should be added, there is nothing stopping you from doing so. In addition, many of those sites already are listed here (C|Net, Google, etc.). If you have nothing more substantial to contribute to the page - and being the admin of LUE2 for a year now, you should - why prevent the 50 or so others working on the page from doing the same? Ant 23:51, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)
 * Also voting against. GameFAQs is a noteworthy, if not more, site for Wikipedia. I would hardly call the other three sites you listed as "pioneering". I've never heard of Gamewinners before now. CheatCodeCentral is full of ads and steals information, especially from GameFAQs. And I haven't heard of 1up.com either. If GameFAQs should be erased from history, so shall Microsoft, Google, Webster, and others. --Mike 00:00, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * GameFAQs is definitely not at the same level as Microsoft or Google. Markl222 22:04 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I disagree with Ant's comment, however, I also vote KEEP. In this case it is purely objective and useful information for someone who is new to the site.  (If any SA people are watching: the difference is that there's a lot of info in your article that is nonobjective, useless, and better left to the forums.  For example, the article does NOT discuss fads like HOW STRANGELY EROTIC, LUEshi, etc.)  Voting delete is rash.  There is a lot more to add to the page.  And it is on the level of Microsoft and Google.  Most of the people I know, the first place they go to when they need help with a game is GameFAQs. I do agree that the page needs work.  I used to watch over it, but I'm currently engaged in a dispute over the SA forums.-- Etaonish  00:06, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Voting against. --Evice 03:31, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep.Gamefaqs is a site that isn't like the other sites.So what if it never made the top 1000? I wouldn't care if a site never made it. Gamefaqs has it's own culture, it's own controversies and most of all, we don't go stealing other guides and if there is plagirisim, it'll be dealt with. I can hardly call stealing other peoples guides and charging them for veiwing 'pioneering'. Another thing is that unlike other sites, we have not only large gaming community, but a large social community.Delete this and you might aswel ask to delete every other site in the "List of sites catergory"-Otacon2009
 * I vote a strong keep, however, please format this VfD properly. Andre ( talk )A| 17:55, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Markl222 implies that CheatCodeCentral, Gamewinners, and 1up are in the top 1000 and/or similar in popularity to GameFAQs. Their Alexa rankings are 3961, 3962, and 7622.  GameFAQs is 685.  GameFAQs has had 180 million posts.  You should know better, as the LUE2 admin. -- Etaonish  00:10, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Absolutely no reason to remove. We do not have a litmus test here. --Golbez 22:19, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * Question: are the "Voting against" votes supposed to be Keeps? It seems like it, but I want to clarify. Andre ( talk )A| 22:32, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * I think they are keeps, yes. --Golbez 01:22, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see no real reason to delete it. As we are trying to gather as much knowledge as we can in Wikipedia, why not keep this?--Easty 22:36, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree with pretty much all keep comments. PMC 00:28, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Uh... nt -dcm
 * Keep. Though I think it may have too much "you have to be there to get it" info. Good thing those damn fads aren't included. HOW STRANGELY EROTIC! Van
 * Every page in the top 1000 Alexa rankings should have an entry. Keep. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 16:32, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hurray for 319! Dark Deity
 * Comment. At least trim the number of external links--Wikipedia is not a link farm. (I'm mostly here to add the section header) Niteowlneils 20:59, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. GameFAQs deserves to be here just as much as all those pages about individual comic book characters. CNash 11:39, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. See previous keep comments for reasons why. -ChibiKuririn
 * Keep. I see no problem with this entry. - Boarderm6235
 * Keep. Unlike some of the sites mentioned above, like Cheat Code Central, GameFAQs has its own culture and history. Recording the culture of a group of people is of an encyclopedic nature and makes this article worth keeping.
 * Keep. This is an important article to many old and new GameFAQs users alike.
 * Keep. Gamefaqs is one of the few game sites that has its own culture
 * Keep. Popular site, with a large community, high Google and Alexa rankings, (mostly) well written article. I see no reason for it to be deleted. - Vague | Rant 08:19, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)