Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilsensine

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This character does not establish notability independent of Dungeons & Dragons 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) 02:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge into List of Dungeons & Dragons deities. BOZ (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
transwiki to some fansite that would love this kind of trivia. As for Wikipedia, all of the sources are non independent primary sources which fail the WP:GNG for having a stand alone article, leaving the options of merge redirect or delete. Given that the suggested merge target is also in the same state as this article with only primary sources and in universe coverage, merging would seem to be merely an exercise is shoveling the shit from one corner of the stall to let it stink in another. There is no evidence provided that someone typing this combination of characters on their keyboard would be looking for this obscure D&D reference rather than some typo and so a redirect to a D&D list may cause just as much WP:ASTONISHMENT as it does in helping, and so delete would seem to be a legitimate option. However, since it was already previously merged [1] it seems we are left with Redirect as an option, and as is necessary in this content area, locked down.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect into List of Dungeons & Dragons deities. The info is verifiable in authoritative sources and the topic is a reasonable search term. Per WP:PRESERVE, merging of verifiable topics is preferable to deletion and WP:ATD-M states Pages about non-notable fictional elements are generally merged into list articles or articles covering the work of fiction in which they appear. As noted, this topic was previously merged in 2008. Except for the publication history, there is not much new since then, so a simple redirect would be acceptable, too. --Mark viking (talk) 20:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge per BOZ. Hihidufgh (talk) 04:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]