![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2013 May 24. The result of the deletion review was revert NAC as inappropriate, leave AfD discussion closed, retain keep result (see talk page of article), and relist 2nd AfD. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was keep. Per
WP:SNOW (
non-admin closure)
Jay
Jay
What did I do? 16:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC), Inappropriate NAC per
Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2013_May_24 - should have been reopened but has been superseded by
AfD2
Spartaz
Humbug! 14:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
reply
OK, may as well get this started: it just hasn't got enough coverage yet. Fails
WP:GNG, specific guideline
WP:WEB. Yes, it was mentioned in
a reliable source, exactly once. Is
The Daily Dot a reliable source? Hmm...
Wikipediocracy is of course a
WP:PRIMARY source about itself. And so on.
Slashdot it ain't.
In my opinion, this AfD was inevitable, and probably best if an uncontroversial wikignome (and one who is happy to admit when they are wrong) kicks off.
Keep it nice and stick to the relevant criteria for deletion, people.
Shirt58 (
talk) 10:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
reply