Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vegepygmy


 * 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 merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. (non-admin closure) SST  flyer  06:09, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Vegepygmy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 23:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 23:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Trivial Google search shows that it has been included in 3rd party D&D-like games like Pathfinder, among other independent RS'es which show use outside the several D&D games published by TSR and Wizards. While many of the creatures you've nominated clearly are better represented in list form, these and most OGL creatures have extended their influences beyond those two publishers' games, adequately demonstrating notability per our guidelines. Jclemens (talk) 05:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think the fact that it exists in multiple works really inherently signifies potential for notability. That alone doesn't solve the lack of sources or the lack of real world information. It's still just a minor creature that has not left any real critical impact from what I can tell. TTN (talk) 17:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, I disagree that inclusion in other companies' games isn't real world impact. Real world impact for games needn't rise to the level of prevailing social consciousness, such as Settlers of Catan T-shirts, to be sufficient, IMO. Jclemens (talk) 07:34, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:24, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Jclemens. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 05:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge likely appropriate, per BOZ. I'm inclined to think that though inclusion in third-party games might indicate notability, it can't make up for a lack of third-party sourcing. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge This still need at least some indication of out-of-universe relevance to meet WP:GNG. OGL content is still product information derived from TSR/WotC material. It's been used in products by other publishers, most of which are themselves non-notable, but this is still fundamentally the same information from the same line of products. This is essentially repeating information for convenience, and open licensing should not be confused for cultural significance. The Pathfinder Bestiary entry shares a page with russet mold, which has already been redirected. Grayfell (talk) 08:27, 17 June 2016 (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.