The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. --Coredesat 05:17, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Note Article was restored by CBDunkerson after it was found that the article used to be a perfectly good disambiguation page. Good catch. --Coredesat 01:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ambar[edit]

Query notability, seems like a game guide rather than an encyclopedia article MidgleyDJ 10:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, purely a game guide. No assertion / evidence of significance of the game. Deizio talk 10:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep but remove original research. Wikipedia is not an instruction manual.--Húsönd 16:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, Weak delete unless reliable third party sources are provided to assert the notability of the game.--Húsönd 16:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 00:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete unless someone can demonstrate notability (it's worth noting that it has an Alexa rank of ~260,000, but this really needs sources). Oh, and tag it as needing a complete rewrite. Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 01:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Lack of sources, large amount of OR game guide info. Wickethewok 03:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Totally indiscriminate information and a game guide. The Kinslayer 10:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.