Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crenshinibon


 * 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  The Icewind Dale Trilogy. And merge from history as deemed editorially necessary. The "keep" opinions do not address the policy-based deletion rationale, i.e. a lack of reliable independent sources discussing the topic.  Sandstein  12:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Crenshinibon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable fictional artifact. Claritas § 15:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep pending a search for sources, but merge to The Icewind Dale Trilogy otherwise. BOZ (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:BURDEN suggests you should !vote delete if there are currently no sources available. --Claritas § 18:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation of your reasoning. BOZ (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Per WP:AFDFORMAT, a keep recommendation can only come after sources are provided. You cannot preemptively keep or preemptively validate any source that might be presented, otherwise that means you are casting a vote.Folken de Fanel (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: this is a MacGuffin central to the plot of four novels and a videogame. I agree that the article as written contains far more in-world information than necessary and needs a pruning;  but AFD is not cleanup.Vulcan&#39;s Forge (talk) 22:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please provide third party reliable sources to support your assertion of notability. --Claritas § 12:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree, Vulcan's comment is a textbook violation of WP:AFDFORMAT, which states that "When making your case or responding to others, explain how the article meets/violates policy rather than merely stating that it meets/violates the policy". Without any explanation as to how this article would meet our notability requirements (and "being central to the plot" is not one of them), Vulcan's "keep" recommendation is liable to be discarded by the closing admin.Folken de Fanel (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator has "retired" after past socking in fictional elements-related discussions had been brought up. Existing sources in the article are varied and show broad coverage of this fictional element. Jclemens (talk) 20:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This article is sourced only to primary sources, ie the novels in which the subject -a fictional artifact- appears. Since WP:GNG states that, for notability purposes, sources must be "secondary" and "independent of the subject or its creator", Jclemens's above comment is obviously bad faith and should be discarded by the closing admin.Folken de Fanel (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to The Icewind Dale Trilogy. I could not find anything to help this one. Web Warlock (talk) 15:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to The Icewind Dale Trilogy: non-notable article that doesn't meet the General Notability Guideline. The only sources available are primary and that is not enough for a stand-alone article. Given that The_Icewind_Dale_Trilogy already covers everything that can be said on the artifact, I don't see any content here that could be merged without being redundant.Folken de Fanel (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theo polisme  17:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per Vulcan.  Automatic Strikeout  ( T •  C) 17:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "Per Vulcan" doesn't give any explanation as to why the article should be kept. Your comment is thus also liable to be discarded by the closing admin.Folken de Fanel (talk) 19:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Icewind Dale Trilogy. No notability, at all, outside of the fictional works in which the weapon appears. Since this keeps coming up, let's be clear: sources from TSR and Wizards of the Coast never establish any form of notability for Dungeons & Dragons-related fictional elements, no matter how many such sources are cited. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Icewind Dale Trilogy: it's a plot device in the book series and fails WP:GNG on its own. Hekerui (talk) 10:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Icewind Dale Trilogy, and merge any little bits into the plot as desired. This could be moved to a list of Forgotten Realms artifacts article later on though. —Torchiest talkedits 23:49, 2 January 2013 (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.