Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dungeons & Dragons goblinoid deities


 * 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. – sgeureka t•c 08:17, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

List of Dungeons & Dragons goblinoid deities

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Collection of minor characters that cannot stand on their own. As a grouping, it also fails to stand on its own. This doesn't establish notability for the grouping. This doesn't act as a valid split either. None of these characters appear to be critical to understanding the lore of the franchise. They are too minor to require coverage on a general encyclopedia. TTN (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:CRUFT as the nominator has stated - minor Lightburst (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - None of the entries are individually notable, and there is no information in reliable, secondary sources that discusses them as a group in any way sufficient for it to pass WP:LISTN. There are nothing but primary sources being used, for both the inline citations, as well as in the further reading list.  Rorshacma (talk) 02:25, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Goblin (Dungeons & Dragons). BOZ (talk) 12:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Primary-sourced fancruft better off in a D&D wiki. On a side note, BOZ, please include a legitimate reason for keeping an article instead of just blindly voting such simply because they're D&D related. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  06:11, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete- Yet another list of fictional cruft sourced (poorly) to primary sources. Reyk YO! 09:54, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:16, 23 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge as above. Perfectly legitimate merge target and merging should always be preferred over outright deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete It is time to end knee-jerk preservationsism, there is not sign of notability here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Pure gamecruft, fails WP:LISTN.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:06, 23 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.