Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wizard (fantasy)


 * 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 Keep. Agent 86 01:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Wizard (fantasy)


This article has had several months of confusion. It's never gone beyond much more than merely being an un-sourced descriptive list. Attempts to add such things as a sourced Etymology have been opposed, usually by a single editor consistantly reverting. See: Talk:Wizard (fantasy) if you have a long length of time to read. Note that you will want to attempt to read the page history contemporary to the discussion, else it can become rather hard to follow at times. One editor has created continuous streams of RfCs, and even when spamming several other editor's talk page, only 1 or 2 people have responded. Since then the article's information has been merged to several articles. Now it's to the point of navigation and a disagreement of where the redirect should point to. I think it's time to just delete this mish-mosh of an article, and move on. - jc37 20:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm confused. Wizard (fantasy) is currently a redirect to Wizard.  That's a disambig page (and there's no question of deleting it Too many valid references).  What exactly do you have a problem with?  Are you sure you don't want to take this to WP:RFD?  FrozenPurpleCube 21:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. This is an otherwise valid redirect that goes to Wizard, another article that is otherwise perfectly valid.  --Dennisthe2 23:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. For some history:  after a dispute about what information was appropriate (the first RFC), a compromise was proposed that the article be merged with Magicians in fantasy.  Jc37 merged information to Magicians in fantasy and List of magicians in fantasy -- and then redirected the article to Wizard.  As the Wikipedia guidelines clearly show, this is not the standard practice for mergers.  Neither would deleting it be.  It should be redirected to one of the pages it was merged with.  Rather than enter an edit war, I opened the second RFC -- and those two RFC constitute the "continuous streams of RfCs" that Jc37 complains of.
 * I note that one of the other editors has consulted an adminstrator, and reports that there are licensing concerns about merely deleting it. Goldfritha 23:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, if some of the content has been merged elsewhere, the record of this article must be kept. Furthermore, I suggest the people involved go through Dispute Resolution to resolve their differences.  FrozenPurpleCube 01:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Wizard (fantasy) is over two and half years old and has a long edit history. It's contents were merged into another article, so the resulting redirect can't be deleted because it contains a list of editors who contributed to the content that was merged into the Magicians in fantasy article.  We need to keep that list to satisfy the GFDL licence that Wikipedia uses. Since the information was put into the "Magicians in fantasy" article, the standards would seem to indicate that that is the proper choice for redirect.  Dreadlocke  ☥  04:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - the edit history at Wizard (fantasy) certainly needs to be kept. The issue of where the page redirects to is, in fact, independent of where the material formerly in it was moved or merged to, despite what some people have been saying. I'll discuss in more detail over on the talk page. Carcharoth 13:13, 24 November 2006 (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.