- 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 but allow merge discussions. There is clearly no consensus for deletion, but the question of whether a merge or plain keep is warranted was left a bit open by comments as many of them are conditional on the presence of additional sources Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 10:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Axis Mundi: The Book of Spirits
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Axis Mundi: The Book of Spirits ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article for this Werewolf: The Apocalypse tabletop game supplement currently cites only one source, and fails the general notability guideline. I have been unable to find any further coverage in RSs - hits on google are either user-contributed material (like the White Wolf fan wiki, or user-edited pages on RPG.net) or places selling the book, and google books does not seem to find anything relevant to Axis Mundi outside of other books in the same series. Alexandra IDV talk 04:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Alexandra IDV talk 04:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related articles, also Werewolf supplements, which also only cite one or (in the case of Caerns and Chronicle) two sources; I cannot find any further RS coverage for them, either.
- Caerns: Places of Power ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Chronicle of the Black Labyrinth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Freak Legion: A Player's Guide to Fomori ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Red Talons Tribebook ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
-- Alexandra IDV talk 04:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep all because we do have some sources and something to build on, or at worst merge the available sources into
List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books. All of the books have at least one review, and some of the books do have more than one review, and I will see what I can do about finding the reviews I have yet to add, and whatever other sources might exist.
BOZ (
talk)
05:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- I do not have access to any of these sources, but there are more potential reviews (under "Linked Items") for Axis Mundi and Caerns, at the very least. BOZ ( talk) 17:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep on Caerns and Chronicles, which both have two RS reviews. And if we are not able to find more reviews of the others, merge into List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books, given that each of them has one RS review. Guinness323 ( talk) 05:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per BOZ.
Freeknowledgecreator (
talk)
08:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Are you arguing that an RPG supplement only covered in a single magazine review would be notable for a standalone article?-- Alexandra IDV talk 11:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 14:20, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Merge all of the articles that only have one valid secondary source to List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books. A single source is generally not enough to pass the WP:GNG as a stand alone article, but would make them valid candidates to merge to one of the main franchise articles. The ones with more than a single source should probably have been listed on AFD separately, though, and should probably be Kept and relisted and examined separately to avoid the possibility of a WP:TRAINWRECK. Rorshacma ( talk) 17:00, 3 December 2019 (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.
- 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 but allow merge discussions. There is clearly no consensus for deletion, but the question of whether a merge or plain keep is warranted was left a bit open by comments as many of them are conditional on the presence of additional sources Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 10:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Axis Mundi: The Book of Spirits
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Axis Mundi: The Book of Spirits ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article for this Werewolf: The Apocalypse tabletop game supplement currently cites only one source, and fails the general notability guideline. I have been unable to find any further coverage in RSs - hits on google are either user-contributed material (like the White Wolf fan wiki, or user-edited pages on RPG.net) or places selling the book, and google books does not seem to find anything relevant to Axis Mundi outside of other books in the same series. Alexandra IDV talk 04:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Alexandra IDV talk 04:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related articles, also Werewolf supplements, which also only cite one or (in the case of Caerns and Chronicle) two sources; I cannot find any further RS coverage for them, either.
- Caerns: Places of Power ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Chronicle of the Black Labyrinth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Freak Legion: A Player's Guide to Fomori ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Red Talons Tribebook ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
-- Alexandra IDV talk 04:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep all because we do have some sources and something to build on, or at worst merge the available sources into
List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books. All of the books have at least one review, and some of the books do have more than one review, and I will see what I can do about finding the reviews I have yet to add, and whatever other sources might exist.
BOZ (
talk)
05:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- I do not have access to any of these sources, but there are more potential reviews (under "Linked Items") for Axis Mundi and Caerns, at the very least. BOZ ( talk) 17:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep on Caerns and Chronicles, which both have two RS reviews. And if we are not able to find more reviews of the others, merge into List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books, given that each of them has one RS review. Guinness323 ( talk) 05:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per BOZ.
Freeknowledgecreator (
talk)
08:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Are you arguing that an RPG supplement only covered in a single magazine review would be notable for a standalone article?-- Alexandra IDV talk 11:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 14:20, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Merge all of the articles that only have one valid secondary source to List of Werewolf: The Apocalypse books. A single source is generally not enough to pass the WP:GNG as a stand alone article, but would make them valid candidates to merge to one of the main franchise articles. The ones with more than a single source should probably have been listed on AFD separately, though, and should probably be Kept and relisted and examined separately to avoid the possibility of a WP:TRAINWRECK. Rorshacma ( talk) 17:00, 3 December 2019 (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.