Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of TPR Storytelling resources

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:13, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of TPR Storytelling resources[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a slightly unusual request, as I am the author of the page. When I wrote this back in 2010, I didn't really understand the general notability guideline, and I am not aware of any sources that could be used to prove notability for this topic. It almost qualifies for speedy deletion criteria G7, but there is one significant IP edit in the history. I'm fond of the topic, but I think the article would probably be better off placed on a TPRS-specific wiki - there's no need to keep it here if it isn't notable. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 15:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as What Wikipedia is not; the list is a directory. Mr. Stradivarius's suggestion that the topic is probably not notable in this form also seems right to me. Cnilep (talk) 05:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for all the reasons given by the nominator and by Cnilep. Wikipedia is not the appropriate venue for publishing this kind of information. Kudos to Mr. Stradivarius for recognizing that it doesn't belong here! --Orlady (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the noms rationale. Regards. —Hahc 21 15:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.