Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital Web

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 keep. Keeping at this time. Please expand and improve the article. If concerns remain about notability, please consider bringing up WP:MERGE on the article's talk page or re-nominating if deletion is preferred. Thanks everyone for your participation and for assuming good faith! Missvain (talk) 18:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Web

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Digital Web (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Recreated after PROD deletion. No evidence of notability. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:44, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment for now: The content that was deleted due to PROD was unrelated to this new topic, and I moved the edit history of that magazine to Digital Web (magazine). Meanwhile, I found evidence that the new unrelated content has two product reviews. BOZ (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep based on my comments above, as I added one of the reviews and will see what I can do about getting a copy of the other one. At worst, since there are two reviews, merge to List of Mage: The Ascension books rather than delete. BOZ (talk) 19:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The addition of the French site Guide du Rôliste Galactique as a reference would give two RS, which would suggest notability.Guinness323 (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - meets NBOOK, the relevant policy. Newimpartial (talk) 13:54, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:59, 15 January 2020 (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.