- 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 speedy delete. A1, lack of context to adequately describe the subject. Mgm|(talk) 13:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Maxxor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This creature may not be notable enough for inclusion. The article is unsourced. I am taking this to AfD because I do not fully understand what the article is about. Richard Cavell (talk) 00:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There is not enough information to merge into a list of creatures from the particular trading card game this is from and the assertion "third best" is original research. Trading cards are made so each creature has strengths and weaknesses in different areas. Third best is something that cannot be determined, without that there's no context - or content for that matter so in my opinion the deletion could be speedy. - Mgm|(talk) 01:04, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:N, or possibly Merge to Chaotic Trading Card Game (which in itself could use a rename). —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 01:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete--and I would support a speedy. There's nothing in this article that would add anything of value to Chaotic Trading Card Game. Drmies (talk) 01:07, 4 December 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.