Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kopru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Philippe | Talk 04:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kopru

Kopru (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Dungeons & Dragons monster of questionable notability. Appearances in old and new supplements, as well as a rather significant module and articles in Dungeon and Dragon, but no evidence of third party coverage. Due to their prevalence in The Isle of Dread, a merge to our article on the subject may be appropriate. J Milburn (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete Seriously fails WP:N. ArcAngel (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep Meets WP:N via references from 3rd party sources. 68.40.58.255 (talk) 01:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge/redirect to Isle of Dread, per J Milburn. BOZ (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge this one into Isle of Dread. Since there's a convenient place for it to go that won't compromise that article, there's no reason not to do so. --Ig8887 (talk) 03:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete — non-notable. Mention in a list. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions. --Gavin Collins (talk) 10:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No secondary sources, no assertion of notability. Fails WP:RPG/N and WP:N. Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, mention at Isle of Dread We don't need another transparant Illithid clone stanking up the market. -Jéské (v^_^v :L10 Lucario Cleric of Mew) 23:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, mention on Isle of Dread - I always kinda liked the Korpu in a weird way. But that doesn't mean they are notable. Web Warlock (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - Featured prominently in five different printed sources which are correctly referenced here. Meets WP:N via references from 3rd party sources. (If these references have been just been added we might need a recount) --SpockMonkey (talk) 19:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
    • They are also prominently featured in "Stormwrack" and I just added that info. --SpockMonkey (talk) 19:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
      • Sources cited are two supplements, a module, two appearances in Dungeon and one in Dragon. None of these are third party- they were all published by whoever owned D&D at the time of publishing. J Milburn (talk) 20:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge into The Isle of Dread. Non-notable due to lack of third-party references. They wouldn't be significant D&D creatures if it weren't for their presence in the X1 module. Too bad - I thought they had potential and never saw them as Cthulhu knockoffs. JoeFink (talk) 20:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge into The Isle of Dread. The references aren't bad, on the low side of mediocre, but... They're pretty damn obscure, and outside of that original module they've never had much presence or importance. Not notable on their own.Shemeska (talk) 21:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • delete - not notable outside of a gaming manual. Recommend against merging - Isle of Dread could be brought to AfD soon as well. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 21:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Disagree- the module has won small awards and has featured in numerous third party publications, through reviews and other mentions. J Milburn (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
      • Yeah, no way - if you can get Gavin to admit that something is notable, then it's just not going to get deleted.  :) See previous AFD for Isle of Dread. BOZ (talk) 03:12, 7 March 2008 (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.