Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeomanry (Greyhawk)

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 Keep, consensus is clear that the article should be given more time to have reliable secondary sources added. Will have to be renominated if sources are not added within a reasonable time period. Davewild (talk) 19:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yeomanry (Greyhawk)

Yeomanry (Greyhawk) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fictional location from a RPG game. Fails WP:NOT#GUIDE, and WP:FICT on account of having no reliable secondary sources. Tagged as non-notable, but no improvement forthcoming. Gavin Collins (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions. --Gavin Collins (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Being a fictional location from an RPG is not grounds for deletion. Reliable secondary sources can and should be added. Tagging as non-notable might well be appropriate, but there is no deadline for improvement of articles, and AfD isn't supposed to be used as a tool to force article improvement. Rray (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Rray.--Robbstrd (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Rray. BOZ (talk) 01:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as per Rray. Edward321 (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Rray. Gavin, I don't think these AFDs are being made in good faith. You say that you added a notability tag to this article but that no improvements are forthcoming. But you've only given editors a couple of months from the original posting of the template. Not everyone spends as much time on Wikipedia as you do, so you're not giving interested parties enough time to fix entries before you delete them. Further, you are tagging and deleting so many articles so often that it's almost impossible to keep up with you. Why not take a little time off of this crusade and give people some time to make improvements? The pace of your templating and requests for deletion is exaspirating, and it's really taking a lot of the fun and love people have dedicated to Wikipedia out of it. If your plan is to wear down RPG page editors from participating in Wikipedia, congratulations. It's working. I don't deny that several of these pages should be merged or deleted, but you're posting on all of them, often about subjects you know nothing about, and expecting everyone to keep up with your pace. That's unfair, and it's really disappointing. I know that you think these efforts are improving Wikipedia, but in fact you're really limiting the utility and fun of Wikipedia for thousands of readers, all by youself. I really wish you would just give this crusade a rest for a few months so people can address your templates, fix the articles that need fixing, or clean them up themselves. You are upsetting a lot of people and not giving those who care to improve these articles anything close to a fair chance to do so. I wish you'd give it a rest. Iquander (talk) 03:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to change my vote to Keep per Iquander. ;) BOZ (talk) 03:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep Not clear why it's not notable. Hobit (talk) 03:42, 16 December 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.