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.
Non-notable minor D&D creature that fails
WP:GNG. Almost no mentions in reliable sources and nothing significant enough to merit its own article. Wikia-level fancruft. ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 07:15, 18 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, this article fails
WP:GNG as it is sourced entirely to primary sources and
WP:PLOT since it is written from an entirely in-universe point of view. It is not mentioned at
Monsters in Dungeons & Dragons, so that is not a good redirect target. The article contains nothing of relevance to be merged.
Devonian Wombat (
talk) 22:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete - Coverage of this creature in non-primary sources or gamebooks is trivial, at best, and certainly not enough to pass the
WP:GNG or to sustain an independent article. The lack of coverage also means that it is not a notable enough topic to be covered at the main D&D monster article.
Rorshacma (
talk) 02:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete; no secondary sources. Redirects are cheap, so no harm if someone wants one.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 19:56, 21 April 2020 (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.