Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spawn of Tiamat


 * 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 no consensus to delete. The source identified by Colonel Warden seems to denote notability. Merging is possible if an appropriate target can be found. Sam Blacketer 17:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Spawn of Tiamat

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A list of non-notable dragons that has no real world context. These dragons cannot meet the notability requirements of WP:FICT due to lack of reliable secondary sources. Pilotbob 22:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletions.   -- Pilotbob 22:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Subdolous 22:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable enough. For example, see review in which the subject is highlighted as being the best part of Monster Manual IV. And coverage in Dragon #260.  There's also something about the real world Spawn of Tiamat in Harran by Seton Lloyd & William Brice, Anatolian Studies, Vol. 1, 1951 (1951), pp. 77-111.  Colonel Warden 23:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as pure spawn spam. No primary or reliable secondary sources, no notability at all. A mention in a book review is about as much evidence of notability as a listing in a telephone directory, and citing sources that have no relation to these fictional instances of Tiamt is just misleading. --Gavin Collins 14:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Colonol Warden. Gavin, I think you need to look up the definition of "spam"--this article is far from it--Robbstrd 04:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That was a joke, but not a funny one I'd admit.--Gavin Collins 22:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and merge - I think this would be a decent footnote in another article which provides more context. Keep the content that isn't just rambling on about the plot details, and merge. -Harmil 06:00, 5 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.