Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athach

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 Redirect to List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters (1977-1999); by keeping it as a redirect editors can easily go in and pull out anything that needs to be appropriately merged other places. . - Philippe 14:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Athach

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

Article about a fictional character that fails WP:NOT##PLOT. There are no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability outside the Dungeons & Dragons franchise. Constructive attempts to cleanup or merge this article with another topic have failed. --Gavin Collins (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. —Gavin Collins (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep for now and close debate; at User:BOZ/List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters I have been actively working on a page to merge monsters like this to. I expect this page to go live before this AFD is even completed. I will voluntarily merge and redirect Athach to List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters (1977-1999) (currently known as User:BOZ/BD&D Monsters#TSR 1071 - Rules Cyclopedia (1991)) once I have created it if that will satisfy the closer of this AFD. BOZ (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• Merge per BOZ. This is an ongoing work (the merging) and an AfD at this time seems out of place. Hobit (talk) 01:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per BOZ. The AfD is unwarrented given the work that BOZ and others are undertaking.Shemeska (talk) 01:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - this is a work in progress and Wikipedia should not bow to Gavi's timetable. Web Warlock (talk) 02:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Wikipedia:Five pillars, i.e. consistent with a specialized encyclopedia on Dungeons & Dragons. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per BOZ and Le Grande Roi. McJeff (talk) 17:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Merge Delete and userify in BOZ's userspace so he can work on his list. There's no secondary coverage, so it fails to meet WP:N and should be deleted; that a user is "working on a list" isn't sufficient reason to put up with it in the meantime. Percy Snoodle (talk) 08:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Were it to be userfied, then the simplest thing to do would be to just move it using the move feature rather than delete and the restore under a new name. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

At which point I would just merge and redirect back into the list, making doing anything else seem silly at this point. :\ I'm 99% done with the lists and will be going live with them today or tomorrow. BOZ (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

...And, there it is, no more waiting or "working on a list". This article now has a legitimate merge destintion, if merge is what is to be. BOZ (talk) 23:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Right you are. Vote changed, and well done for putting the work in. Percy Snoodle (talk) 13:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated (the "pat on the back" moreso than the vote changing, which is also cool).  :) BOZ (talk) 13:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• Redirect to List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters (1977-1999). Not sure there would be much to merge. --Craw-daddy | T | 22:26, 16 April 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.