Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TV Tropes Wiki (2nd nomination)

No reliable sources found, no news hits whatsoever. They've apparently been cited by the New York Times and a Lost DVD set but that doesn't inherently make them notable. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No WP:RS that are non-trivial found. I cannot see how this survived its previous nomination. Sorry, but the sources just don't confer notability, and the New York Times article mentioned in the previous AfD links to it (which doesn't mean much). DARTH PANDA^duel 21:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Give it time. Their influence will spread. ^[1] Cyberchao X 2:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment. I have no qualms against recreation then, when this site becomes notable and passes WP:WEB. DARTH PANDA^duel 03:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. If what Cyberchao says is true, eventually secondary sources will be found, but there just ain't any at the moment. JuJube (talk) 03:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have found repeated references to it as an educational resource, e.g. Hekman Library. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is heavily reminiscent of the webcomic deletions--web material is on the web and referenced by other things on the web. Web material is only rarely referenced outside the web. The fact that it's mentioned in more than one non-web source at all could only happen if it's pretty darn notable; it's just that the web notability guidelines are broken.