Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MechQuest
How about this - the persistence and popularity (in terms of contributions from many editors) of this entry and many, many others like it, in the face of rigorous examination from AfDs and the cruft crusade, demonstrates an evolving consensus as to what constitutes an acceptable standard of entry for Wikipedia. I'm not attempting to  anything in here, rather I'm pointing to how recedents|precedent from previous AfDs and existing editor practice suggests a more permissive standard of notability than is currently codified in written policy. As to written policy, I refer to olicy itself, which quite reasonably explains that policy is primarily the result of "codification of current convention and common practice that already have wide consensus... ''The easiest way to change policy is to change common practice first''" (emphasis mine). In other words, policy (such as ) follows practice, not the other way around. And the consensus common practice seems to be that entries which ambiguously meet  yet can be constrained to verifiable information are acceptable. The article will meet this standard once it's cleaned up
— User:Orphic, 06:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:WAX||WP:P||WP:P||WP:N||WP:N (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)