Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dire animal (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. Neil ╦ 11:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dire animal (Dungeons & Dragons)

Dire animal (Dungeons & Dragons) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails to meet WP:Notability, and is simply a list of all the dire monsters found throughout the rulebooks. All the cites are from D&D books or first party articles and a vast majority of the pages linking to this article are redirects —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piuro (talk • contribs)

• Comment: As primary author of this article, and fellow member of the WikiProject, I think AfDing all of these is pointless, and will get us no where. I say that we decide exactly what we are going to do about these articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons/Monsters, and then just do it. We don't need community input to authorise redirecting a tonne (or ton, for those of you not from Europe) of articles if we know that that is what we are going to do, and that is for the best of the encyclopedia. J Milburn 19:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Even if we decide to redirect "Dire Animal" at a later date, this doesn't change the fact that this article as it stands is clutter. Even then, dire animals do not meet WP:Notability, therefore a redirect would be pointless.Piuro 20:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Well, I think there is certainly merit for a redirect to a parent article at a later date, (save that discussion for the appropriate place...) and I admit this article needs to go as it is. I am just reccomending you don't nominate any more, as time can be better spent deciding what to be done with the articles. J Milburn 22:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, and good luck to the closing admin who has to delete all those redirect I made! ;-) J Milburn 22:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• They probably have scripts/bots for doing that sort of thing. — RJH (talk) 15:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep or redirect for now until the WikiProject has had a chance to work out some reasonable guidelines for what to do with the (admittedly ridiculously large number) of monster articles. No prejudice against bringing this up again in a month or so if nothing constructive has happened. --Pak21 20:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment There is no really usable content in this article, even if it was redirected at a later date, it would have to be completely re-written. As such, there is nothing here that warrants clogging up the Wiki. Piuro 23:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, no notability. I can think of a (very) few D20 (née D&D) monster which have achieved notability of their own, dire badgers are not it. — Coren ^(talk) 21:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete or strip to bare mininum before merging to a List of Dungeons & Dragons creatures. Why do we even have a Dungeons & Dragons creatures category anyway?? Circeus 19:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
  • It'll be gone soon. As a project, we are working out what to do with them. J Milburn 20:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete if no characters in list are notable Giggy _U^CP 04:32, 12 July 2007 (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.