Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five Nations (accessory)

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 redirect to List of Eberron modules and sourcebooks. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Five Nations (accessory)[edit]

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

Non-notable book (or game, I guess -- It's a D+D campaign supplement guide.) References aren't turning up, no out-of-universe material, certainly no academic study. Mikeblas (talk) 02:50, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to List of Dungeons & Dragons rulebooks. BOZ (talk) 11:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the decision is made to merge, the correct destination article is probably List of Eberron modules and sourcebooks. No opinion at this time whether that's the right choice; I suspect that some discussion of most of these releases can be found in the various gaming-industry magazines, not all of which are well-represented online. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

merge [1] is a review by someone notable in the field. Counts a bit toward notability. Plenty of other reviews, but all appear to lack editorial oversight. Hobit (talk) 05:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

there being no reliably published third party content to merge, delete. (redirect is also possible, but with the parenthetical DAB it is such an unlikely search term that it seems completely unnecessary.) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per consensus. 24.114.78.27 (talk) 21:46, 6 November 2015 (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.