This article is very long, but it seem to be just a long, badly-formatted elaborate troll.
- Trolling for what? The content may be offensive, yes, but it's not trying to trick you into anything. Keep. --Starx 22:44, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
- Unless a powerful reason is given, I'd say keep. It's a longstanding article, for one. And also it serves as a repository to dump some of the junk people put up on Wikipedia about their sites. It could perhaps use some editing, to be sure. -- VV 22:57, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Not a troll. Factual. Reasonably dignified textual descriptions of the site contents. Not only is the offensive material not shown, but the URL's are carefully not presented as links, so the chances of encountering anything by accident are minimal. The only possible objections I can see are content-based: is a) that it facilitates access to material which some people think should not be accessible and therefore implicitly supports or encourages viewing of same, or b) that it is "not encyclopedic." a) is not a reason for deletion. As for b) IMHO is it more encyclopedic than many articles we have on popular culture, role-playing games, etc. Dpbsmith 22:59, 11 May 2004 (UTC)