From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 delete. Neither "keep" mentions any reliable sources. No sources, no article. Sandstein 13:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Creature type (Dungeons & Dragons)

Creature type (Dungeons & Dragons) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is sourced only by primary sources. It also seems more like a game guide than an encyclopedic article. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
  • bd2412, do you have any sources to show that this is a notable topic? When I do a web search, I mostly get RPG source books, which are neither reliable nor independent. Rockphed ( talk) 17:38, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
    • I am finding it more difficult to pinpoint sources than I would have expected. Nevertheless, typology of monsters is a ubiquitous characteristic of role-playing games. Perhaps the solution is to find a more appropriate term to head this under. bd2412 T 19:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:37, 25 September 2019 (UTC) reply
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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 delete. Neither "keep" mentions any reliable sources. No sources, no article. Sandstein 13:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Creature type (Dungeons & Dragons)

Creature type (Dungeons & Dragons) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is sourced only by primary sources. It also seems more like a game guide than an encyclopedic article. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user ( talk) 17:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
  • bd2412, do you have any sources to show that this is a notable topic? When I do a web search, I mostly get RPG source books, which are neither reliable nor independent. Rockphed ( talk) 17:38, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
    • I am finding it more difficult to pinpoint sources than I would have expected. Nevertheless, typology of monsters is a ubiquitous characteristic of role-playing games. Perhaps the solution is to find a more appropriate term to head this under. bd2412 T 19:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:37, 25 September 2019 (UTC) reply
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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook