Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pandorapedia
First is that it is not yet existing, it is only on a "test" page. Second, it failed  where this was supposed to be covered into any news sources, which, we can't find any at least one. Third, it does not attain any notability. Pandorapedia can be considered as another Bulbapedia, that even though Bulbapedia is famous to Pokemon fanatics, it still does not attain any Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Bulbapedia|significance to attain spin-out. Most of the time, local wikis or wikis that covers information about a purely small topic comparable to list of wikis|large wikis does not need spin out. Furthermore, as Wikipedia:Web#Criteria|this policy wanted to say about how does a website/wiki to be included in Wikipedia, is that the wiki must (1) be recognized into any printed media, which can be verified through the same newspaper or an online counterpart recognizing, in this case, Pandorapedia; (2) is that it has significant trivial coverage. The first website provided in the external links section is a ''test page'' for Pandorapedia, the second one is not yet existing. How come that it has a mentioning that it was "launched" December 9, 2009, if it ''is only on a temporary domain''? We cannot assure that information is |reliable, we can't verify that because there aren't news coverage. Finally, (3) the page about Pandorapedia seems to be premature, Wikipedia:Web#Criteria|this also says that it must gain any recognition or an award from an organization or publication. In any of the three cases I mentioned above, the article failed all of them, especially that it failed one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, the RS
— User:JL, 13:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:V (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)