- 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. Fram (talk) 11:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Histachii (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Dungeons & Dragons monster that has apparently only appeared in a single first party magazine article, nearly twenty years ago. No evidence of third party coverage or significance. May warrant a mention at Yuan Ti, but, if this is its only appearance, probably doesn't. J Milburn (talk) 21:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to Yuan-ti. FYI, first appeared in Dragon mag, then in the Kara-Tur Monstrous Compendium, and most recently in the 3E Faerun Monstrous Compendium. BOZ (talk) 22:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Eurgh, should have realised about the Faerun Monstrous Compendium, think I have that somewhere... J Milburn (talk) 22:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just realised I don't, and the book doesn't actually exist... Anyway, that's irrelevent. J Milburn (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't exist? [1] :) BOZ (talk) 23:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, I see. I thought that was just called Monsters of Faerun. J Milburn (talk) 23:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't exist? [1] :) BOZ (talk) 23:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just realised I don't, and the book doesn't actually exist... Anyway, that's irrelevent. J Milburn (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Eurgh, should have realised about the Faerun Monstrous Compendium, think I have that somewhere... J Milburn (talk) 22:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable. everything cited, here too, is all in-universe. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Locobot (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)-Ravichandar 04:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - completely in-universe with no possibility of independent reliable sources - Peripitus (Talk) 11:04, 17 March 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.