Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halfling

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 23:29, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halfling

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

Delete and Redirect to Halfling (Dungeons & Dragons) - This seemed to be a severe enough WP:POVFORK to bring here for discussion. Halfling (Dungeons & Dragons) and Hobbit already exist, and they both include mostly the same information. The very little meaningful and unique dictionary-like information could be brought to the D&D article. I am also worried that this article might devolve to become a some kind of list for popular culture mentions. Ceosad (talk) 05:25, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The D&D article would have to be moved to this name, as there would be nothing to disambiguate against any more. Not sure about whether it should be deleted or not. I suspect halflings are not notable independent of D&D, and skimming through RPG sites seems to back this up. However, it's difficult for me to figure out a good search string to pull up relevant results in reliable sources. Maybe I can figure out something better later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, this article was created 12 December 2003, while Halfling (Dungeons & Dragons) was split from it on 9 February 2010, so inappropriate to delete this, rather discussion should be about merging the two? Coolabahapple (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to other solutions as well. If the consensus is that a some kind of merge is the best solution, it is okay by me. As far as I know halflings are not notable outside of D&D. The term itself is just an ancient neologism to avoid copyright problems. WP:NOTDIC. There is practically an article for each D&D creature. Category:Dungeons & Dragons humanoids Ceosad (talk) 17:18, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this and merge and redirect Halfling (Dungeons & Dragons) back to this article and remove popular culture list magnet.--KTo288 (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, clpo13_(talk) 17:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and convert to disambiguation page. Tolkien and D&D halflings both deserve mention and links to their articles. I don't see a real problem with listing other fictional, or legendary, halflings as well.Borock (talk) 19:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and convert to dab seems reasonable here. ansh 666 22:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and disambiguate, as above. I doubt either fictional race could lay claim to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this, or more accurately I don't think this community could ever conclusively agree on which. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge: I added some references to demonstrate notability. Praemonitus (talk) 23:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete, either keeping the current page or converting it into a disambiguation page. There can easily be debate over whether hobbit or halfling (Dungeons and Dragons) (or perhaps something else) is the primary topic, but since it can plausibly refer to either one, deletion would clearly be unhelpful. Nyttend (talk) 02:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and dab per others. VMS Mosaic (talk) 10:32, 22 December 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.