Deletion of List of major cities in World of Warcraft

Comment: I recently did a major overhaul to this article, so I would be sad to see it go.  I also agree that World of Warcraft as a topic is quite notable.  Looking at this AfD objectively, however, I definitely think that this article's level of detail pushes it firmly into |fancruft territory.  It'd be great to see it transwiki'd to http://www.wowwiki.com WoWWiki, but as someone mentioned earlier in this discussion, that info is already there.  Perhaps the best course of action is to include a link to http://www.wowwiki.com/Category:Cities this WoWWiki page in the top-level World of Warcraft article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:CRUFT)

Comment: Applying the generic notability test to these kinds of forks doesn't make a lot of |sense. We could stuff this into World of Warcraft so that it would pass the letter of , but that would be rather silly. |Content forks like these are appropriate, especially for games with 9+ million players
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means (WP:SENSE||WP:N||WP:SS)

Comment: On the heels of the RuneScape AfD sequence, and on the still-warm corpse of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Player versus player in World of Warcraft/Archive 1|original AfD comes another group of nominations from an editor who has five minor edits a month prior to these noms. I make no apologies for sounding cynical, however, I am still getting that feeling that someone is still |trying to make a point. I guess I'd feel a little more confident in this whole series of AfDs if they were nominated by an editor who has a little bit more of an active history. |I do disclose a conflict-of-interest, as I am a contributor to several of these
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:COI)

Comment: no evidence of independent notability. #HOWTO|Game guide-y
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)