Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phyton (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
keep or merge |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games|list of Games-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:TTN|TTN]] ([[User talk:TTN|talk]]) 01:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)</small> |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games|list of Games-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:TTN|TTN]] ([[User talk:TTN|talk]]) 01:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)</small> |
||
*'''Delete''', as was the consensus at the previous AFD. Nothing has changed in the last 13 years as far as notability for this minor fictional deity goes, and it still completely fails the [[WP:GNG]]. Since I already know there are going to be some suggestion to redirect this to the [[List of Greyhawk deities]], I will preemptively argue that even if this is the consensus, it should still be deleted before the redirect, to prevent the typical IP user restoring it against consensus, as is so common with these D&D articles. [[User:Rorshacma|Rorshacma]] ([[User talk:Rorshacma|talk]]) 02:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''', as was the consensus at the previous AFD. Nothing has changed in the last 13 years as far as notability for this minor fictional deity goes, and it still completely fails the [[WP:GNG]]. Since I already know there are going to be some suggestion to redirect this to the [[List of Greyhawk deities]], I will preemptively argue that even if this is the consensus, it should still be deleted before the redirect, to prevent the typical IP user restoring it against consensus, as is so common with these D&D articles. [[User:Rorshacma|Rorshacma]] ([[User talk:Rorshacma|talk]]) 02:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' or '''merge''' to [[List of Greyhawk deities]]. [[User:BOZ|BOZ]] ([[User talk:BOZ|talk]]) 02:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:59, 23 January 2020
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Phyton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. Seems to follow the usually pattern of being deleted via AfD, restored to act as a redirect, and then restored as an article for whatever reason. TTN (talk) 01:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 01:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 01:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Delete, as was the consensus at the previous AFD. Nothing has changed in the last 13 years as far as notability for this minor fictional deity goes, and it still completely fails the WP:GNG. Since I already know there are going to be some suggestion to redirect this to the List of Greyhawk deities, I will preemptively argue that even if this is the consensus, it should still be deleted before the redirect, to prevent the typical IP user restoring it against consensus, as is so common with these D&D articles. Rorshacma (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep or merge to List of Greyhawk deities. BOZ (talk) 02:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)