Deletion of Hogwarts Live

Comment: There is going to be an obvious bias in this response and this should not be counted as a vote to keep the article.  I will state for the record that the site in question is my own.  I am familiar with the community's opinions on Wikipedia:Fancruft as well as Wikipedia Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|policy and guidelines.  I have been asking other Wikipedians on their opinions concerning whether this article should be deleted and have received mix responses.  I know personally that I have found articles that in many respects are less notable than this one, such as ISFDB, Archspace, or HPANA, useful, educational, and even interesting.  Notability seems to be based on one’s own subjective interpretation of whether or not a source is reliable.  I would like to examine this page http://stats.hogwartslive.com/cgi-bin/awstats.pl?month=07&year=2006&output=refererpages&config=hogwartslive.com&framename=mainright, which shows not only that the Hogwarts Live article is read by a great deal of people, but that many websites directly related to the topics of Harry Potter or Roleplaying are referring users to Hogwarts Live. As you can see for the month of July, 1369 users were referred to HL via its Wikipedia entry.  The term "sciencecruft" has sometimes been used as a sarcastic opposition to deleting obsolete topics due to certain biases concerning their pertinence. There is no official policy on fancruft, and I would not consider it a legitimate reason to delete an article.  Wikipedia aims to incorporate elements of "specialized encyclopedias" among other things.  I do believe this article could be rewritten to be more succinct, clearer, and |verifiable. To quote policy: "some editors may object if you remove material without giving people a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, a good idea is to move it to the talk page." Also, I feel that the fact that this site receives a considerably large number of pageviews (over '''1 million''' a day) in comparison to many other websites that have Wikipedia articles, is testament to its notability.  Alexa lists HL in a similar traffic rangehttp://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=hogwartslive.com as sites such as http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?q=pepsi.com&url=pepsi.com Pepsi.com, http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?q=freeadvice.com&url=freeadvice.com  FreeAdvice.com, and http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?q=mpogd.com&url=mpogd.com MPOGD, all of which are popular in their respective industries.  Just to get this out of the way I would like to state that I disagree with the recent proposed deletions of  Space - Glory Through Conquest, Pirates of the Caribbean Online, List of Final Fantasy characters (including many others), and will proceed to further voice my opinions on this matter on their appropriate deletion discussion pages. However, if I am indeed mistaken and none of these articles are worthy of Wikipedia entries, I’ll be more than happy to copy the contents of these articles over to a Wiki I started as a sort of supplement to Wikipedia, which does not allow as much freedom for fans to create detailed articles on the minutiae of certain fandom due to the fact that the average reader will not find them pertinent or in many cases "notable".  This is just my perspective on this matter, not a vote to keep or delete this article, as I said my opinion is obviously biased, and is more of a assertion of what I believe are the merits of these articles that are often described as fancruft. Thanks for hearing me out
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)