Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lord Mazdamundi


 * 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   merge to Lizardmen (Warhammer). (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Lord Mazdamundi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I very carefully researched this character, with and without the "Lord". I discovered that it is not discussed in any scholarly analyses, not analysed in any independently published books, nor mentioned in any news items. The level of "internet appreciation" of this character is low; 319 Google Hits. I even compared the page view statistics of this article (less than 20 a day) to others in its game, who are in general much higher. (Those that were not I just tagged for notability.) A note on the talk page from March seems to be a pre-vote for deletion. All in all I felt reasonably confident that this would be an uncontroversial deletion. Deprodded. Abductive (talk) 20:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 21:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge - with parent topic. -Falcon8765 (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge I do not see what page view stats has to do with suitability for an article: --and if they did 20/d =7300/year--which is substantial use. We're an encyclopedia not an Abridged encyclopedia. Such numbers are totally meaningless as  a argument to delete, and we have long reject ghits as a criterion also. This is apparently one of the principal characters in the game, and therefore appropriate for an article. If not actually that important, then a merge and redirect is in order-not a deletion. I deprodded this; I did not deprod some others which I though really were pretty obvious. DGG (talk) 23:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * He is not a "principal character", he is a progenitor. But it really shouldn't matter what role a character plays in a fictional work, but the number of secondary sources on them, zero in this case. Abductive (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * if he is not a principal character, then what your argument justifies is a merge. DGG (talk) 00:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * if he is any kind of character at all with no reliable sources, the best one could hope for is a merge.


 * Merge to the appropriate character list. Edward321 (talk) 00:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Lizardmen (Warhammer), doesn't seem to have independent notability. Jclemens (talk) 02:34, 19 July 2009 (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.