Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leucrotta (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 keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 01:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Leucrotta (Dungeons & Dragons)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article fails to establish notability. The top ten list is not enough on its own. TTN (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep as the Geek.com list is a start of notability, or failing that merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 21:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per BOZ. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:33, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * weak keep From what I can tell, D&D is the source of this term (I can't find a reference with this spelling that predates it, though Pliny the Elder's description is clearly the basis for this) and there are a lot of references.  for example among others.  Hobit (talk) 04:36, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as most everything in Crocotta derives from this instantiation of the mythological beast. Furthermore, in addition to the Geek.com source, we have Geek Dad, and more importantly than that, we have a number of sources occurring after the publication of D&D stats for the monster which have clearly been influenced by this fictional portrayal of the mythological element:, , etc. Jclemens (talk) 04:43, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. I honestly don't know why people are claiming that this creature, or even the spelling they used, originated in D&D.  It did not.  This is a real mythological creature.  Leucrotta is an actual spelling of said mythological creature that did not originate with D&D.  Those books that Jclemens brought up are talking about the mythological creature as it existed in folklore, not the D&D creature.  The fact that the books happened to be published after the monster's introduction in D&D does not somehow automatically mean that those books were basing their information from D&D.  I actually own one of those two books (the one by Carol Rose), and I can assure you that there are no D&D sourcebooks listed as one of its citations, so unless there is some sort of evidence proving that these sources were "clearly influenced" by the D&D version, this is a non-argument.  As for this article itself, there are no sources about the creature that are not official D&D publications outside of the one top ten list, which alone is not enough to establish notability.  This particular creature is not even a particularly well known or notable monster within the D&D multiverse, let alone in a real world context.64.183.45.226 (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2016 (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.