Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magical beast (Dungeons & Dragons)
: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. No sourced content, nothing to merge. Randykitty (talk) 16:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
=[[Magical beast (Dungeons & Dragons)]]=
:{{la|Magical beast (Dungeons & Dragons)}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Magical beast (Dungeons & Dragons)}})
article is little more than listcruft, minor rules/categories for a game don't need individual articles
- Comment - I completed the nom for IP 172.56.41.116. ansh666 07:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep as a valid merge target, or failing that Merge into List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters and other related lists as appropriate. BOZ (talk) 12:56, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 13:36, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 13:38, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
- Merge per BOZ. I can't find any coverage of the concept of a magical beast itself, but the article does serve some purpose as a merge target for other articles. —Torchiest talkedits 11:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete or Merge No independent coverage in reliable secondary sources of the subject matter - seems more appropriate for a topic specific wiki. Nwlaw63 (talk) 14:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deadbeef 10:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'd say we should keep it per the second paragraph of WP:LISTN. Hobit (talk) 11:30, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- delete there being no sourced content to "merge". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- Comment a problem with the merge target (1st edition etc.) is that it only covers part of this list. Again, I think it's a reasonable navigational aid. A category would work too, but lists can be more easily sorted (by edition in this case) and we could start adding short descriptions here. Hobit (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
: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.