Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leira (Forgotten Realms)
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 08:12, 7 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 08:12, 7 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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 merge to List of Forgotten Realms deities. Black Kite (talk) 18:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Leira (Forgotten Realms)[edit]
- Leira (Forgotten Realms) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This character does not establish notability independent of Forgotten Realms through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 17:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge into List of Forgotten Realms deities. BOZ (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into List of Forgotten Realms deities. Not independently notable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- transwiki to some fanboy site that would love this trivia. as far as Wikipedia goes, the subject fails WP:GNG as there is no independent coverage of the subject - all the materials are published by the creator or by companies officially licensed by the creator - and so the article should be deleted or merged if there is appropriate content that is appropriately sourced to add to an appropriate target article. Since there are only primary sources, it seems unlikely that merging would do much more than move issues from this page to another where they will need to be dealt with later. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Arguments above regarding independence of sourcing set the bar too high. Fact is, multiple separate companies have published material detailing this fictional element in multiple separate (although admittedly related) game systems. Jclemens (talk) 04:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- fact is, the bar is being set no higher than any other project- WP:POKEMON - all articles are expected to have independent reliable sources take note of them in a significant manner. There is no exception for D&D products. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Procedural close as redirect/merge to List of Forgotten Realms deities. This article was one of a series of related articles initially merged to the above target by User:Neelix subsequent to discussion in October 2010; the merge was reverted by an IP-only editor just over a year later. This suggests tacit agreement that the redirect and merge was acceptable to the majority of editors associated with the wikiproject. In my opinion, a return to the status quo would serve the encyclopedia better than a prolonged and potentially heated debate over each individual deity article. (Note: there are other similar article currently nominated for deletion; I will copy this !vote/recommendation to those affected as well.)Vulcan's Forge (talk) 00:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge (after trimming) into List of Forgotten Realms deities or Delete, per TRPoD, NinjaRobotPirate, Vulcan's Forge. Only primary sources, fails WP:GNG (which is not negotiable).Folken de Fanel (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2013 (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.