Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snotling (3rd nomination)


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 12:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Snotling
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable fictional topic. The reception is trivial. TTN (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:10, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


 *  Redirect Delete (to Ork (Warhammer 40,000)) - a very minor part of the 40K species with no non-inuniverse coverage. It might warrant a line but not a merge. Does seem a legitimate search target. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * ZXCVBNM makes an excellent point about there being two legitimate redirect targets, so a redirect would be less suitable. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:18, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable, and given that the term is used by two fictional universes, Warhammer and Warhammer 40k, it's probably better for the search function to return results than send people to the wrong place.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: the name may be the best thing to come out of Warhammer, but otherwise nobody cares. It seems that this name is so awesome as to warp time and show up in a 1912 catalog of US government publications (okay, so it was a Walter O. Sn*tling who authored something). With the two targets, I agree that a redirect is inappropriate. Rockphed (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to Ork (Warhammer 40,000).  If we're taking a "delete as no coverage outside the universe" than there'd be nothing under Category:Warhammer 40,000 outside of the lead article alone.  Andy Dingley (talk) 18:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
 * and thats a bad thing? Coolabahapple (talk) 09:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It's a bad thing when it's done by incremental attrition, where an editor nominates articles one-by-one through an obviously notable set, until at the end there's nothing at all left, and much of the justification for each deletion was based on "Well, we've just deleted, so  aren't notable either". This has just been done to Kill Bill, where the character articles have now been deleted, even the overall list article.
 * If anyone wants to delete the whole of Warhammer, then go for it. But do it openly, don't just start chipping bits off from the bottom. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If something is “obviously notable,” then it will have sources to back it up. No amount of OTHERSTUFF being deleted would allow something truly notable to be deleted. TTN (talk) 13:50, 29 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge. 'Cute' little buggers. I found a few mentions on them in non-WH text that suggest they are a dictionary topic (ex. "he looked like a snotling hedgehog with alopecia"). There are some mentions in passing like but I couldn't find anything in-depth. I like them personally, but I can't find any justification for keeping them as a stand-alone article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Not sure what sourced material there is to merge. SportingFlyer  T · C  02:14, 30 September 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.