Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/War of the Lance

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 keep. The consensus is not to delete, a merge is possible, but can be discussed outside AfD. Tone 18:21, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

War of the Lance

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I'll be honest, I'm at a total loss here as to how this is encyclopaedic. The vast majority of this is an unreferenced plot summary. I've now done some research into Dragonlance, which is a quality article, and I think most of the top part can be merged there, but I don't think this is notable enough for a standalone article, especially since most of the sources don't seem as if they pass WP:GNG (not independent or secondary.) SportingFlyer T·C 13:10, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 13:10, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to Dragonlance as suggested above. BOZ (talk) 13:33, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to either Dragonlance or Dragonlance Chronicles. As mentioned by the nominator, the article itself is mostly an excessively long plot summary, most of which is not sourced or sourced only to primary sources. Searches are also not coming up with anything but primary sources or brief plot summaries. Of the two redirect options, the one to Dragonlance Chronicles makes more sense to me, as this article is basically just a summary of the plot of that trilogy of books, but either target works. The small bits of actual real-world information on its publication history can be merged into either article, though it looks like most of that information is already present. Rorshacma (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Dragonlance. It is a searchable term and there are a few things here that I could see merged into Dragonlance so we can't lose the history. But a seperate, mostly plot page is not appropriate. --Masem (t) 15:37, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:01, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep as the AfD creator is suggesting a merge rather than a delete, which can be discussed and worked out on the article's talk page. On that note though, I do think this article at the very least needs a massive trimming. It's possible a small kernel of notability is buried at the heart of this, but I can't check for reliable sources on it right now. —Tourchiest ^talk_edits 17:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I do want this deleted. I'm just acknowledging some content may be able to be merged. SportingFlyer T·C 02:02, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article could use a rewrite, however WP:NOTCLEANUP. WP:PRESERVE. The nominator lacks conviction, and acknowledges that there is notability, by conceding that there could be a merge. WP:ATD. Lightburst (talk) 02:12, 2 November 2019 (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.