Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taulmaril


 * 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. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Taulmaril

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This element of fiction does not establish notability independent of its series. Without coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN (talk) 22:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * keep why are you copying and pasting that reason on several articles? Anyways, this is Not at all a plot summary. I see no original research either. Or on many of your other AfD Melune (talk) 23:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; unencyclopedic snippet of fancruft. --MCB (talk) 02:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete; Unfortunately, I can't find any citations, so regrettably, it has to go. Celarnor Talk to me  04:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge I'd try to get  the information merged somewhere in the description of the game play. Calling the contents plot summary, though,  seems to be expanding the meaning significantly. Nor does it really represent OR to describe a weapon in a game from primary sources. But still, there isn't enough information to stand alone, even though its a major game. I  try to make sure my answer shows that I did at least read through the article in question and have some idea of the context. DGG (talk) 06:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect or Merge not OR or Plot Summary really but, not notable enough for its own article either. Redirect or merge to the character, the book, or similar artilce. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect or merge per Jasynnash2. Because of the lack of notability of this fictional element, all article expansions would result in violations of PLOT and OR, so that's why this stub shouldn't be kept as its own article. – sgeureka t•c 19:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP:PLOT and WP:GNG apply here, as clarified in WP:VGSCOPE. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2008 (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.