Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metallic dragon


 * 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 Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons). Please be selective of what to merge, don't merge all of it. (non-admin closure) ミラP 16:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Metallic dragon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fictional creature, no evidence of passing WP:NFICTION/GNG, PRIMARY sources only, pure WP:PLOT, BEFORE does not show better sources. Deprodded by User:Necrothesp with no helpful rationale Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:46, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:46, 5 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge. I think "PRIMARY sources only" is incorrect: As far as I understand from the description and comments on Dragonlore: From the Archives of the Grey School of Wizardry, that is an independent secondary source. A Practical Guide to Dragons seems to be a primary but independent source whatever that's worth. And the brass dragon featured (strangely) in the Dungeons & Dragons controversies taken up by another independent source, Dangerous Games. That said, I am opposed to deletion, but would be fine with either keeping the article or a reasonable merging and redirecting into Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons). Daranios (talk) 06:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons). Personally I believe this is a notable enough topic to remain as a standalone article given the notability and popularity of the game, but even if it is not, no useful purpose is served in deleting information that can be merged elsewhere. This recent swathe of attempted deletions of articles on fantasy and science fiction topics makes me uncomfortable (especially potentially notable topics being prodded to attempt to get them deleted without discussion), as it suggests that some editors are having fun getting rid of valid content, which is certainly not what Wikipedia is all about. We delete rubbish and very minority interest material. We do not usually delete material that is central to major literary works and games. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete for failing WP:GAMEGUIDE, WP:PLOT (which refers to "Summary-only descriptions of [creative] works" at large), and WP:OR (e.g. "Physically, the bronze dragon is quite fierce in appearance, despite its good nature."). All present sources are for trivial publication info. Since even its parent article likely shouldn't exist, this is just excessive. – sgeureka t•c 12:28, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure plot. Not a shred of analysis. Fails NFICTION.Kacper IV (talk) 12:38, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons) per above. BOZ (talk) 12:50, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge per above Poydoo (talk) 14:45, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons) if that stays, otherwise Delete per nom. Devonian Wombat talk 20:45, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge as above. I am not sure there is enough to justify a free-standing article, but any important content on metallic dragons surely belongs in the article on dragons more broadly. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Total WP:GNG failing plotcruft, nothing to merge.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:02, 11 December 2019 (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.