Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikinfo (6th nomination)
I am particularly distressed at statements like "Fails ", that are so prevalent at AfD's these days. These statements fundamentally misconstrue the notability guidelines.  states, "''If an article currently does not cite reliable secondary sources, that does not necessarily mean that its topic is not notable.''". This means that having nontrivial secondary source coverage guarantees notability, but the converse is not true - a lack of sources alone cannot override other arguments for notability. The same is true for . This article is notable for all the reasons above, and all the reasons in the previous 6 AfD's, which have not been sufficiently rebutted by those here voting "delete, fails 
— User:Z00r, 22:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:WEB (Wikipedia:Notability)