I was checking through the articles I had created, and it seems that another one was deleted. The article in question was one of the talkers, called Resort.
Deletion log: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...Resort_(talker)
So let me get this straight: this dickhead Edgar181 insists that it makes no claims of notoriety. Sorry, but most popular talker ever is a claim of notoriety. If you don't think that that is sufficiently notable, then go ahead and delete all of the articles listed on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Internet_talkers
It also looks pretty stupid, because Resort is listed elsewhere.
Not to worry, because its got a little subset here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foothills_%28talker%29#Resort
Now, we saw previously that the most popular MUD in history, with 500 users per day for 10 years straight, Aardwolf, managed to get deleted on an AFD because only 4 people voted, and none of them knew what a MUD was or were prepared to research anything. This time we have a talker which had 400 users per day for years, but nowadays only gets 20-40, but has been for the past 15 years in the top 5 most popular. And yet this dickhead says that it makes no claim of notoriety!
I mean, in context, obviously you're not going to see this article in Britannica, so by that standard perhaps its fair enough to delete it. But compared to everything else, and even compared to the other articles on less notable talkers, seriously why the fuck did this guy think that it warranted not just being nominated for deletion - but being speedy deleted! I mean seriously!