The result was delete. The arguments to keep the article fail to cite any policy-based reason for doing so, whereas the delete position has multiple policies that would seem to support it. No prejudice against recreation as a redirect. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC) reply
In-universe, unsourced OR, tagged for sources for 3+ years with no improvement. Doesn't seem reparable, as nothing in the article at all is out-of-universe, nor does it assert real-world notability. Deprodded. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The arguments to keep the article fail to cite any policy-based reason for doing so, whereas the delete position has multiple policies that would seem to support it. No prejudice against recreation as a redirect. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC) reply
In-universe, unsourced OR, tagged for sources for 3+ years with no improvement. Doesn't seem reparable, as nothing in the article at all is out-of-universe, nor does it assert real-world notability. Deprodded. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC) reply