Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centauri Knights


 * 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 Big Eyes, Small Mouth. This is w/o prejudice to merging any material provided it is adequately sourced and meets our other relevant guidelines. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Centauri Knights

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

For the preceding 15 years, article has been sourced to one page in one book. A BEFORE (Google News, Google Books, JSTOR, newspapers.com) fails to find additional sources. Fails GNG. Chetsford (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Merge (and Redirect) to Big Eyes, Small Mouth - the individual published setting is of decidedly less interest than the overall Big Eyes, Small Mouth game system for which it was originally published. Per WP:BEFORE C.4, the nominator should have considered a Merge, per WP:PRESERVE this is the policy-compliant course, and per WP:ENC the notable game system, for which the setting was designed, is the most appropriate merge target. The Nom should, per policy, consider withdrawing this nomination so we can get the merge done efficiently and not clutter AfD. AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Newimpartial (talk) 20:28, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Big Eyes, Small Mouth. The sourcing on even that article seems rather iffy, but as long as its still there, redirecting this supplement there would make sense.  This supplement is already listed there, and there isn't really much in the way of sourced content that needs to be merged, but if there is anything people feel should be transferred over, the history will be there to allow for any merging.  Rorshacma (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2020 (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.