Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictional websites in Doctor Who
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. khaosworks 11:44, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Fancruft Project2501a 22:45, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The article is about websites that you can actually access that are tied into the programme as it airs. (disclosure: I expanded it tremendously from its origins as a simple listing). --khaosworks 01:44, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. There may also be more of these websites created soon. --Jawr256 14:28, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. A useful summary of the sites and their reasons for existence.--The Brain of Morbius 02:45, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The websites exist as real websites so both both have fictional and actual notability --TimPope 16:19, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I am not a 'fan' but found the article interesting. --Taras 04:02, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This article interesting and will probably be expanded on later.--GingerM 18:22, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I am a friend of jawr and know how much he is obsessed with Dr Who. This page is very interesting.--Jwm2004 18:20, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Ties directly into the plot of the full season of the show, and covers details clearly. Radagast 16:51, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
- strong keep. As a viral marketing method for a television series it is leading the way. Instead of fake '555' telephone numbers and references there is an integration and cross-over with 'reality' (for some value of). --Vamp:Willow 12:15, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. user:Ted-m 18:09 UTC, May 29 2005
- Keep. Major and interesting element to an ongoing series and no more "fancrufty" than the many articles on elements of Star Trek and Star Wars. 23skidoo 12:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. What an utterly bizarre idea to delete a long article with lots of information - almost contrary to the idea of an encyclopedia.--83.138.189.75 06:10, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) [Sorry, this comment was actually Energy, who forgot to log in!]
- Comment: This discussion has been open for almost 14 days, and all votes except for the initial delete have been to keep, so shouldn't we think about closing this now? --Jawr256 09:12, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.