Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamriel Rebuilt


 * 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. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Tamriel Rebuilt
Article gives no indication of satisfying, WP:V, WP:RS or WP:SOFTWARE Whisp e ring(talk/c) 00:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All information in the article can be found on the site linked, and there is precedent for having articles on large modifications such as this one.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete until there's a assertion of notability made in the article itself. A large mod is one thing, but if it's not notable (in fact, it's still in-progress) then it shouldn't have an article. Also, using the very projects website as its only citation is inappropriate. Themindset 19:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep So? So are a tons of other mods on WP. I say keep because I can probably do a Google search and find tons of other gaming sites. Planet Elder Scrolls, various blogs. And it is notable. Typing 'Tamriel' on Google, the mod will be the first entry. Swiftoak  16:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment It doesn't matter if the subject is the first thing on a Google search (it comes up near the top primarily because it has "Tamriel" in both the title and the top-level domain, which helps its placement by quite a bit). I come up first on a search for me, but I'm still not notable enough to warrant an article. (now pardon me, but I'm going to go cry now...) EVula 15:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * :( Okay. I added some new external links. Swiftoak   t  18:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, clearly still does not satisfy WP:SOFTWARE. Swiftoak, if you think this page should stay, read that guideline and see if you can provide evidence that the mod satisfies it. Vectro 06:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, so it doesn't. I still believe it can be improved. And besides, the guideline is still a proposed guideline of Wikipedia.  Swiftoak   Talk to Me!  23:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. A profound and all-too-common misapplication of Wikipedia. — Encephalon 06:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * How so? Of course go ahead and delete it, but I just wanna know. Swiftoak   Talk to Me!  17:22, 21 October 2006 (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.