Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsweyr (2nd nomination)
Appearance
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 delete. kurykh 01:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Elsweyr
AfDs for this article:
- Elsweyr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article lacks reliable third-party sources, thus failing WP:N and WP:V. "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." Only source is "The Imperial Library" which is an unreliable fansite. Previous AFD closed as "no consensus" based on idea that article could be improved, but that we should "relist in a few months". After nearly one year, it's reasonable to conclude that this article cannot meet our content guidelines and policies. Randomran (talk) 00:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am also nominating the following related pages because they fail the exact same policies/guidelines. (Also, they have been proposed to be merged. But a merge is inappropriate as it would fail to resolve the issues with WP:N and WP:V.):
For your consideration. Randomran (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. Randomran (talk) 00:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Elsweyr. Fails WP:N. For the uninitiated (and since this isn't readily apparent in the article), Elsweyr is a section of the game world of the The Elder Scrolls series. However, as almost all of the games in that series have taken place in different portions of the game world, it can't really be considered as a "setting" common to all 4 games. It is still mentioned in the games, but only in vanishingly little detail (especially so in Morrowind). The most likely source for third party coverage of this would be a review or retrospective of The Elder Scrolls: Arena, however, non-trivial coverage of the game setting is unlikely given most of the types of reviews these games see. Protonk (talk) 02:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on Tamriel That is a little more likely to have some coverage, as it is the overarching setting for most of the TES games (-morrowind). Protonk (talk) 02:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- While I agree with Protonk that Tamriel has a better chance of having reliable third party sources than Elsweyr, the fact remains that there are no such sources for either article. A previous AFD on Tamriel closed as no consensus one year ago with zero sources found, and none found since. I think this is decent evidence that the article just won't hit its sourcing requirements, and should be deleted. Randomran (talk) 00:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and merge into game article. Summaries of plots, other in-universe stuff should go into whatever Wiki covers this game. Potatoswatter (talk) 08:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Elsweyr, tentative keep Tamriel - Per Protonk. — neuro(talk) 13:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete both - Someone could write a rather awesome "Universe of The Elder Scrolls" article sometime, in which none of the material in these articles has any place because it's written from a wholly different focus. User:Krator (t c) 00:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete both - Cruftastic. The bulk of the citations for Elsweyr are from fictional books O_o. Marasmusine (talk) 11:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Neither assert notability at this time. If sources are found, they should be added to the parent articles first, and potentially split off if there is enough information. TTN (talk) 21:30, 28 October 2008 (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.