Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ray Of Frost (June 2004)

Ray of Frost
Wikipedia is not a D&D strategy guide. Thue 20:47, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Neutral - Wikipedia is not paper. I'd rather see it moved to Dungeon & Dragon Spells or some such generic title where a larger collection could be gathered. - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  21:04, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * That would seem fair. But individual articles for spells is overdoing it. Thue 21:10, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to cantrip. -Sean Curtin 22:23, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I was looking for delete, but there's actually a decent article in here. Keep or merge with a List of D&D spells (and don't omit the description and uses). Do NOT redirect to cantrip--that would be like redirecting George W. Bush to President of the United States. Meelar 04:26, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wiki is not paper. Putting in on a list of AD&amp;D spells might work for now, but that list is huge, and a page having a paragraph the size of this article for each spell would be unusable. AD&amp;D spells could be a category. If we have a page for every Pokemon invented, and every town in the USA, no matter how small, I don't see a problem with pages about AD&amp;D spells. Preferably good, interesting articles. I wouldn't give it high priority, but if someone invests the time to write one, why punish it by deleting it? What does Wikipedia gain by deleting it? Abigail 12:58, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Move content to a list of Dungeon & Dragon Spells in order to make it more obvious to other author/editors that we do not now have very many listed (and that we want them at least as much as all the Pokemon articles). We can always break that list apart later when it becomes unmanagably large. Rossami 14:59, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed, move to a spell list as suggested previously. When too many short articles are separated, it does become more difficult for the user to navigate through the information sought. Perhaps when the list of spells becomes unwieldly, break it into sectoins based on level or school. - siroxo 15:57, Jun 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This article is not objective. End of story.--[[User:HamYoyo|HamYoyo (Talk)]] 14:18, Jun 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * True, that last sentence could use some revision, but it really made the article, at least for me. That's the kind of information I might expect to find in an encyclopedia. I've reworked it. Meelar 15:06, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless pseudoinformation. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:33, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly good information. Possibly merge in the future if a general article on spells is created. Everyking 05:16, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Dungeon & Dragon Spells. I am a roleplayer of Dnd, this is correct. However, much care must be taken to avoid copy vios. Burgundavia 11:38, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm rather fond of this little article myself. Voyager640 04:37, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)