The result was Merge. While I'm sorely tempted to delete the lot as purely in-universe, lacking any notability, it looks to me like the lack of clear consensus is best served by merging and redirecting these articles into one general article with background info on these playable races. I don't really care about the nmame for such an article, I'll take one name suggested here. The merge may take a while, so please be patient. Fram 11:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply
Note: several AFDs about Warcraft articles were started at the same time, Melsaran merged the debates for convenience.
See also:
An article regarding each individual race of the Warcraft worlds would only appeal to the gamers themselves rather than real world context, failing WP:N. Non-players reading these articles would not have much if any interest in reading this article at all about an individual race in the games. IAmSasori 20:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC) reply
Yikes, it looks like someone listed every since Warcraft race for deletion. Curiously, that editor (IAmSasori) has almost no edits other than a ton of Warcraft related AFDs, which makes me curious about their motives. Consequently, I'm going to cut-and-paste my Keep text to most of the rest of these AFDs:
Thanks for merging it, despite the fact that the reason why the last nomination failed was because they were merged in the first place. Notability is not inherited, therefore separating the articles into sub-articles would not make abide by WP:N. IAmSasori 13:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply
The nomination above deals with WP:N which is not a criteria for deletion. Under WP:N the proper channel to go through would be for IAmSasori to first go through and tag each of these articles for notability, challenging the editors at each page to find good reliable sources to back up the notability of the article. If an individual article's editors cannot reliably back up the article's notability, ONLY then should the article be nominated for deletion. That would also require going through that process with each and every article, instead of sweepingly removing them all at once like this nomination is trying to do. If IAmSasori wants to see these deleted, he should go through the proper channels first and do the grunt work in each and every one of these. After reading all these criteria, I am concerned that this really is a bad faith nomination, although I wanted to assume good faith with my original post. It just hard to believe someone is being constructive and a helpful editor when 95% contributions are WoW nominations for deletion -- Jdcaust 21:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC) replyReasons for deletion include but are not limited to violation of copyright, content that does not belong in an encyclopedia, content not verifiable in a reliable source, and unreferenced negative content in biographies of living persons. In the normal operations of Wikipedia, approximately five thousand pages are deleted each day through the processes outlined below.
The result was Merge. While I'm sorely tempted to delete the lot as purely in-universe, lacking any notability, it looks to me like the lack of clear consensus is best served by merging and redirecting these articles into one general article with background info on these playable races. I don't really care about the nmame for such an article, I'll take one name suggested here. The merge may take a while, so please be patient. Fram 11:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply
Note: several AFDs about Warcraft articles were started at the same time, Melsaran merged the debates for convenience.
See also:
An article regarding each individual race of the Warcraft worlds would only appeal to the gamers themselves rather than real world context, failing WP:N. Non-players reading these articles would not have much if any interest in reading this article at all about an individual race in the games. IAmSasori 20:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC) reply
Yikes, it looks like someone listed every since Warcraft race for deletion. Curiously, that editor (IAmSasori) has almost no edits other than a ton of Warcraft related AFDs, which makes me curious about their motives. Consequently, I'm going to cut-and-paste my Keep text to most of the rest of these AFDs:
Thanks for merging it, despite the fact that the reason why the last nomination failed was because they were merged in the first place. Notability is not inherited, therefore separating the articles into sub-articles would not make abide by WP:N. IAmSasori 13:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply
The nomination above deals with WP:N which is not a criteria for deletion. Under WP:N the proper channel to go through would be for IAmSasori to first go through and tag each of these articles for notability, challenging the editors at each page to find good reliable sources to back up the notability of the article. If an individual article's editors cannot reliably back up the article's notability, ONLY then should the article be nominated for deletion. That would also require going through that process with each and every article, instead of sweepingly removing them all at once like this nomination is trying to do. If IAmSasori wants to see these deleted, he should go through the proper channels first and do the grunt work in each and every one of these. After reading all these criteria, I am concerned that this really is a bad faith nomination, although I wanted to assume good faith with my original post. It just hard to believe someone is being constructive and a helpful editor when 95% contributions are WoW nominations for deletion -- Jdcaust 21:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC) replyReasons for deletion include but are not limited to violation of copyright, content that does not belong in an encyclopedia, content not verifiable in a reliable source, and unreferenced negative content in biographies of living persons. In the normal operations of Wikipedia, approximately five thousand pages are deleted each day through the processes outlined below.