Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spells of 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 of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Spells of Dungeons & Dragons
Even though I wrote it, it's a kind of 'meh' article that's better explained by other sites.
 * Delete, fancruft and kind a strange article as it doesn't list the spells, just the categories. I'm and old school gamer and this article doesn't even appeal to me (no offence to the editors who worked on this).--Isotope23 21:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm another old school gamer.  Sorry, guys. Durova 21:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Did someone cast "Summon Fiend"? Erm, anyway, having one article on spells in D&D is certainly a better idea than articles on each spell and the like. This level of attention is still much less than we give to many much less notable games. I think we can handle a single article like this, though I'm wondering if such an article would discourgae people from writing individual spell articles, or encourage them. If it's the latter, I might be tempted to vot to delete. No vote until I look into the matter a bit and see how this subject is covered already. Keep. A cursory examination seems to indicate that this isn't really covered elsewhere, and it's not excessive detail (yet, let's hope it stays that way). Given many multitude of significance D&D has over something like Gundam Wing, this article seems almost necessary. -R. fiend 22:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, necessary to a half-decent description of the D&D universe. 'Meh' and 'better explained by other sites' are not reasons for deletion. Kappa 00:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep There is currently no article which deals with magic in the AD&D universe. This is a good start, and even though the author may not be happy with his work, someone else may be intersted in continuing what I see to be an excellent start. D e nni &#9775; 02:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Integral part of D&D. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:48, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; although it could do without the Specific Spells section. &mdash; RJH 18:20, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Cruft, but reasonably significant and interesting cruft. Xoloz 03:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Doesn't seem to show up elsewhere. It's legitimate information and verifiable. Superclear 12:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it's fine --TimPope 21:32, 15 November 2005 (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.