The result was Delete; there are seemingly unsurmountable problems about what Wikipedia is not, and notability outside the game universe, but the killer blow comes from verifiability. Without sources, the article is doomed to remain a repository of original research. This article is also the destination of the contents of a number of articles on the individual races which staved off deletion by being merged there; this has been put forth as an argument to keep— but I find it unsupported by policy, and therefore unconvincing. — Coren (talk) 05:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC) reply
There is already a list of characters for the Warcraft series, there are also individual character articles where a character is notable. There is even a Warcraft universe article! But this list is just a mountain of original research, and which is also unsourced and written in an in-universe way, and is also a regurgitation of facts and trivia from the various Warcraft game articles, so it is entirely duplicative. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 23:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete Despite nearly an entire month after the merge, this article has still remained largely unsourced, unnotable fancruft containing a large amount of plot summaries.
The only source on the page is to a Warcraft site. It does not have a third-party source to establish its notability to the real world, indicating that readers who do not play any games in the series would most likely have no interest in reading these articles.
Along with that, it comprises of fancruft which has a tendency to attract original research, furthering it from being properly sourced. It also contains a large amount of plot summaries within the various races which Wikipedia is not.
It does not seem like any effort is placed into improving these issues of the article brought up last time, and it can be assumed that intentions of improving it will not occur without this AfD being made. IAmSasori ( talk) 15:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete; there are seemingly unsurmountable problems about what Wikipedia is not, and notability outside the game universe, but the killer blow comes from verifiability. Without sources, the article is doomed to remain a repository of original research. This article is also the destination of the contents of a number of articles on the individual races which staved off deletion by being merged there; this has been put forth as an argument to keep— but I find it unsupported by policy, and therefore unconvincing. — Coren (talk) 05:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC) reply
There is already a list of characters for the Warcraft series, there are also individual character articles where a character is notable. There is even a Warcraft universe article! But this list is just a mountain of original research, and which is also unsourced and written in an in-universe way, and is also a regurgitation of facts and trivia from the various Warcraft game articles, so it is entirely duplicative. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 23:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete Despite nearly an entire month after the merge, this article has still remained largely unsourced, unnotable fancruft containing a large amount of plot summaries.
The only source on the page is to a Warcraft site. It does not have a third-party source to establish its notability to the real world, indicating that readers who do not play any games in the series would most likely have no interest in reading these articles.
Along with that, it comprises of fancruft which has a tendency to attract original research, furthering it from being properly sourced. It also contains a large amount of plot summaries within the various races which Wikipedia is not.
It does not seem like any effort is placed into improving these issues of the article brought up last time, and it can be assumed that intentions of improving it will not occur without this AfD being made. IAmSasori ( talk) 15:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply