Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kampfult

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 merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solifugid (Dungeons & Dragons) for further reasoning. So Why 14:11, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kampfult[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not establish notability. TTN (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 22:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above, unless third-party sources are forthcoming. Josh Milburn (talk) 00:42, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:14, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- not notable; there's nothing to merge as the content and the sources are all "in universe", such as Monster Manual II, a "rulebook published for different versions of the Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) fantasy roleplaying game". K.e.coffman (talk) 21:26, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per BOZ and WP:ATD-M. I'll note that K.e.coffman's opinion is not policy based, in that primary sources are perfectly acceptable to verify uncontroversial content; they just don't count towards notability. Jclemens (talk) 05:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per BOZ. Not notable by itself; looks like the link BOZ provided is the perfect place for this content. Cthomas3 (talk) 05:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per K.e.coffman. Nothing to merge. - TheMagnificentist 08:29, 13 July 2017 (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.