Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Risk: The Lord of the Rings Trilogy Edition


 * 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 Risk (game). Clear consensus not to retain as a standalone. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Risk: The Lord of the Rings Trilogy Edition

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a limited edition special version of a notable game. While the game itself is notable, I'm having trouble finding reliable sources that actually discuss this specific special set. Fails WP:GNG. Hog Farm (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete a non-notable entertainment theme variation of the game. Just because something mentions LOTR does not make it notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This game has only been mentioned by a handful of Internet forums. &#8213; Susmuffin Talk 00:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Risk (game) - I agree with the above about the lack of reliable sourcing means this particular variant does not come close to passing the WP:GNG. But, a valid target exists, and it is already listed there. Rorshacma (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Rorschacma. —&#8288; 烏&#8288;Γ (kaw) │ 23:12, 07 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 18:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Rorshacma. Severely lacking in sources, but has a sensible redirect target where it can be mentioned. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Rorshacma.Iamnotabunny (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2020 (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.