Deletion of Witch Hunters

Comment: the 'real world notability' statement I made was in order to ensure that it was clear this article should be judged on the merits of the |general notability guideline.  In other words, the subject of the article doesn't present a compelling reason for us to |ignore all rules and cover it.  If, for example, Jedilofty were to nominate Space Marines (Warhammer 40,000), I would argue that the subject's status as a primary sub-faction in 40k meant that we should not delete it.  Here, the important guideline covering this topic is |notability.  The subject isn't notable, as no third party sources cover it, so wikipedia probably shouldn't have an article on it.  I'm afraid that this is much more the failure of Games Workshop than of Wikipedia.  GW, as they profit from the publication of source material, guards their intellectual property jealously.  This means that very few works exist which cover the fictional elements of the game that '''are not''' produced by games workshop.  And things are probably going to get worse before they get better.  There are roughly Wikipedia:WikiProject_Warhammer_40,000#Quality_Assessment|110 articles under the purview of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000|Warhammer 40K wikiProject and the eventual number is likely to be ~60.  We've lost a lot of members to the project because of these strings of deletions (I think the 40K project peaked at ~200 articles) and we need editors to help us build encyclopedic (Not |exhaustive) coverage of these subject.  Will you help us
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IAR||WP:N||WP:IINFO)