Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plant (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 Delete, and expand whatever Creature type gets renamed to. Prodego talk  17:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Plant (Dungeons & Dragons)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has no content, real world context or reliable secondary sources to demonstrate the notability of this fictional vegetable material outside the game settings it is derived from. Gavin Collins 21:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions.   --Gavin Collins 21:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * delete per nom. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 22:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom and oh dear god. Otto4711 22:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Listing of non-notable fictional elements. Doctorfluffy 22:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - user indefinitely blocked as disruptive sockpuppet. — xDanielx T/C 22:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge - There's a misunderstanding, here. This is about a "creature type" in 3rd edition Dungeons & Dragons. It is not about "plants in D&D." It's too narrow, and should be merged to a larger article, perhaps Creature type, which is underdeveloped as it stands. Linkage from the article about changes to the system could help that article by tying it to some concrete examples. -Harmil 06:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per Harmil. BOZ 16:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to creature type and just add two or three notable examples. No need for a full listing. --Polaron | Talk 16:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - not if creature type gets deleted first! haha! BOZ 19:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and use for the place to merge information about plant-type creatures that don't have significant independent notability, since they're currently all getting nominated for deletion as well. This could be a section of the main article if we had infinitely big articles, but since we don't, I think we should keep it and the other creature types as spun-off subsections. Pinball22 19:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Pinball22, or Merge per Harmil.--Robbstrd 23:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:Plot, no real world context, not of use to anyone not playing D&D. Merging this will just make a larger article that will end up getting deleted. Ridernyc 20:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:USEFUL.--Givenarmy 18:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Another list masquerading as an article. Even worse, it's not even real. Bombycil 16:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete OR list per WP:NOR}} and [[WP:NOT. If creature type survives AFD, this should be replaced with a redirect to that page to discourage recreation. Percy Snoodle 16:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: That's right, we must delete or merge this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2007 (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.