The result was delete. I considered a merge, as suggested by some commenters, but frankly, it's impossible to tell what information in the article is reliable, due to multiple anonymous editors doing things like changing the name of the forum's creator. Recommend that if someone is genuinely keen, they start a fresh (sourced) section in Tippmann. --Stormie (talk) 14:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's now a full year that this has been floating around with no attempt made to address the notability concerns raised at the time (see the talk page). While a lot of work seems to have gone into this, I really can't see how it warrants keeping as anything other than a one-paragraph mention on Tippmann; this seems to be the very model of an acorn of an unsourced stub that's been allowed to grow into a mighty oak of original research with a dash of how-to guide and social networking on the side. However, in light of the talkpage debate, the alleged 35,000 members, and most significantly the amount of work that's gone into it by multiple editors who don't appear to have seen anything wrong with it, I don't want to just shove this into the mulcher without a proper debate. Anyone who thinks this is salvageable, speak now... — iridescent 20:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]