Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giant eagle (Dungeons & Dragons)

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. Sandstein 12:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Giant eagle (Dungeons & Dragons)[edit]

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

All the references are to first-party sources, i.e., to game guides and other material published by the game's various copyright holders. Third-party sourcing is lacking both in the article as it stands and in my attempts to find better ones. WP:GNG asks for significant coverage independent of the subject. Despite the longevity and number of submissions, does not appear to be notable under the general or specific guidelines. Not significantly better-sourced since the wp:Articles for deletion/Dungeons & Dragons creatures discussion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment: also created Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Dungeons_&_Dragons#RfC_on_Notability_of_D.26D_Standard_Creatures Thank you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. A very minor D&D monster. While the usual searches do bring up a few hits, none of them can be used as reliable sources, and are merely things like fan-wikis or product descriptions. All of the standard information on the creature is already included in the target article, so there really isn't much else here that would be needed to be merged.64.183.45.226 (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:57, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or merge as above, unless third-party sources are forthcoming. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:58, 16 December 2016 (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.