Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Potter Online Domain


 * 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.--Fuhghettaboutit 02:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter Online Domain

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I'm nominating this page for deletion because I don't feel it's really appropriate for an Encyclopedia article, and I'm not sure if even a redirect is warranted. Since similar AFDs Articles for deletion/Nick.com and Articles for deletion/StarTrek.com were a bit contentious, I do feel this does at least merit some discussion. Yes, Harry Potter is notable. But do these sites meet the criteria found at WP:WEB? The most I can see is possibly some domain name claims for trademarks, and that's not even in this article. FrozenPurpleCube 08:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * baleet. can be mentioned in Harry Potter. --Stephanie talk 09:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge it into Harry Potter - does not need a seperate article. Pedro | Chat  09:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Is there any content that should be merged?  I'm not sure there is, and if not, I'm not sure that a redirect is needed, given that this is not an official name, or one used in practice.  FrozenPurpleCube 10:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. I don't think a merge or redirect is necessary as per FrozenPurpleCube. -- KTC 13:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless there is some real sourcing available, which I doubt there will be. I note the UK web site is also up for deletion at . DGG (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete absolutely no notability for these domains Corpx 17:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Er, it's not clear to me what content these will have that shouldn't just be slipped into the various other Harry Potter articles. I appreciate the author's efforts, but I don't know that these websites, in and of themselves, need an article. Efforts could probably be better directed elsewhere. Looks decent, though, they should stick around and help out. ;) – Luna Santin  (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, just mention the 2 websites on the Harry Potter article. --Pixelface 09:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable original research. Marc Shepherd 02:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. *spoiler alert* this will soon be deleted as non-notable original research.  Burntsauce 20:50, 14 August 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.