Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucifuge Rofocale


 * 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 Grand Grimoire. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:23, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Lucifuge Rofocale

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I have serious concerns about this article (it was recently AfD on pl wiki as a possible WP:HOAX). I am not sure if this topic is a hoax (actually, after my BEFORE, I don't think it is), but first, tit likely doesn't meet WP:GNG, and second, the current article does not seem to cite any RS, and even has a section on "modern demonology"... so it probably warrants a WP:TNT. I did find one ref that seems possibly reliable and in-depth, The Encyclopedia of Demons and Demonology by Rosemary Guiley published by Infobase Publishing. IP seems reliable, but the author - less so (according to our article, she was a " a certified hypnotist" and a paranormal topics researcher, and I have serious concerns about "encyclodias" written by authors with such a background. All other sources about this demon are either less reliable, don't meet SIGCOV o both. As pretty much all sources agree this demon was first mentioned (invented...) in the Grand Grimoire and there are few if any sources mentioning them later in any major capacity, perhaps a SOFTDELETE and redirect to that work would be the best option here? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Grimoire. Anything worth merging would be a few properly sourced entries under the "popular culture" heading, which Grand Grimoire also has. Haleth (talk) 12:31, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Grimoire - I own the Guiley book, as well as another, similar kind of book by Michelle Belanger, another expert on the fringe topics of the occult/paranormal. Both pretty much state the same information as this demon was solely described in the singular source of the Grand Grimoire.  So, its not a hoax (at least not in the Wikipedia sense - obviously the author of the Grand Grimoire initially made it up), but also not really a topic that needs to be WP:SPLIT from the article on the book where he was invented.  Rorshacma (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Grimoire. Not a hoax, but a literary invention.  We normally merge article on characters in imagined universes (Plays, films, books, etc.) back to a main article.  Though this is something much older (abut 300 years old) we should apply the same rule.  Most "in popular culture" sections were deleted many years ago as trivia, so that preservation is not needed.  The etymology might be merged back to the main article, but I doubt that is necessary.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Grimoire per above. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 03:46, 24 November 2021 (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.