Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SkyscraperCity (4th nomination)
oddly enough. I did a few Google Books searches regarding the site, and it's fair to say that  is not met, but nevertheless this website seems to have a fair bit of mindshare, because it seems that it has been referenced from hundreds of books by now. So it stands to reason that we should do what a book would do - keep a footnote quickly explaining the topic, in a sentence or so. In Wikipedia parlance, that would probably be a very short article that just states that it's a website with a forum, which is verifiable. This seems obvious to many readers, but isn't really. It would probably help a bit to elucidate to readers that it's not a reliable source in and of itself. Also, it shouldn't be marked as a stub, since the encyclopedic expansion potential is unclear
— User:Joy, 08:33, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SIGCOV (Wikipedia:Notability)