Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No more room in hell
It would be wiser to ask everyone participating in this discussion to read |Notability and OT|What Wikipedia is Not, Mr. Johnson. The ''NMRIH'' project exists and is verified by at least one external source. This voids the claim of not being ''notable''. Wikipedia articles are not legitimated by hitting a made up number of people knowing about the subject of the article, as this would be against the idea of having a wikipedia. Also popularity of the subject is not a concern, either, otherwise articles like "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide" would have to be deleted due to being "unpopular" and "politically incorrect". The accusation of advertisement is not applicable for wikipedia entries in general, as wikipedia articles require the user to actually inquire about the subject. The only way to use an article as advertisement is to bias it in favor of the subject and then link to it externally. Being a freely available product instead of a commercial one does not make a subject inferior to others and does not prevent it to have it's own wikipedia article. The only difference of information value presented in this article caused by an release would be to change it from "has been attempted" to "has been done", the innovation value would be very similar. My main issue with this article is the estimated release date, as that is speculation, although it is not enough to justify a deletion of the whole article and may be considered custom for modifications in general. IMO the page is well structured and rather unbiased and anyone looking for informations about game modifications will find suitable information about the project. I'd like to see similar information on other modifications in their respective articles, as I doubt that this would cause damage to wikipedia's structure or credibility
— User:Anapher, 11:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:NOT (Wikipedia:Notability)