Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sylloc Server

This article does not state it's importance whatsoever, or any kind of encyclopedic relevance. Tigerclaw81 (talk) 17:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete couldn't it go speedy? LegoTech·(t)·(c) 18:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No mention whatsoever of any notability at all. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - Just forget the AfD, this article falls under WP:CSD#A1. — Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 19:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite. It should go to AFD, because we know what the article is talking about. The only question is whether the subject is notable enough or not to deserve its own article. Gary King (talk) 20:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not appear notable enough to deserve its own article, per WP:N. I could not find any reliable sources that covers the subject. Gary King (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep The article was less than 20 minutes old when it was AfDed and included {{underconstruction}} when they created it. The odds are extremely high that they plan to expand it. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 21:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep I'm with JeremyMcCracken. I've never personally heard of this and I don't personally know if it's notable. But a quick google shows the topic is at least legitimate. It's not pushing an agenda or an advertisement or a POV. You could have waited at least a few weeks before trying deletion, if not a few months... no? Let the creator of the article have his/her chance to make it work. Randomran (talk) 15:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - After giving the article a fair amount of time, I've done a search for sources and can't find anything to help with notability. Article appears to be an entry for a quite mundane game server. Gazimoff ^Write_Read 21:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]