Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gorgon (Dungeons & Dragons)


 * 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 delete. A redirect can be created (and contested) at editors' discretion.  Sandstein  21:45, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Gorgon (Dungeons & Dragons)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 13:11, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, or failing that merge and redirect to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters, because some treatment in secondary sources exists. There is no benefit in loosing that information. In addition to the ones appearing in the article (I have added an online source), the gorgon gets three pages of space in The Monsters Know What They're Doing, and the related Gorgon personality from the Birthright Campaign Setting appears in Pyramid (magazine) no. 16. Daranios (talk) 14:34, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - The primary sources are, of course, not valid as establishing notability. Nor are the sources that are about actual, mythological creatures that may have inspired them, as they are not about the topic at all, and do not mention the D&D creature.  That basically just leaves the book mentioned by Daranios above that, when reading the text, is nothing but a straight description of what the monster is in the game, that provides no actual indication of notability and merely establishes that WP:ITEXISTS.  Thus, the creature fails the WP:GNG.  Rorshacma (talk) 16:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters, though that article also has problems. Per Roshacma, the secondary sources provided do not do anything other than provide in-universe information, and therefore do not count towards WP:GNG. The references already in the article are either primary or do not actually relate to Dungeons & Dragons, and also do not contribute towards GNG. I could not find anything better with a search. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. DnD cruft failing GNG. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. — Sirfurboy (talk) 21:55, 16 January 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.