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 Merge and Redirect I left the history intact so feel free to research and merge as you will. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legend of the Green Dragon

[edit]

AfDs for this article:

The subject's notability seems to hinge on a passing mention in a quote in a slashdot article [1], which frankly isn't enough. A request for independent references was made back in May, nothing has turned up yet. Large number of ghits, but seem to be mostly game directories and suchlike. Marasmusine 16:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Marasmusine 16:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of "significant coverage" from independent, reliable sources. The article itself is at a game guide level, but the lack of notability is the main concern Corpx 18:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/Merge to Legend of the Red Dragon which can be sourced, at least reasonably, though some of them may need to be located offline. FrozenPurpleCube 20:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Per Mister Manticore. - Caribbean~H.Q. 20:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to LORD, saying it as a big contributor to the article. In first AfD, we were basically dealing this as a numbers game (as AfDs were back then) and it could then be easily demonstrated that the game was both popular and widespread at the time, but nowadays (both luckily and unluckily), all we care is the print/tabloid visibility, which this game probably doesn't have. As such, I'm not sure if this warrants an article of its own any longer. However, nothing changes the fact that it's still a popular continuation of LORD; it definitely deserves to be discussed somewhere, if not its own article. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Marasmusine. The article contains little real-world context or independently sourced analysis about the game's development, impact or historical significance, but is a detailed summary of the game's content, and as such fails notability criteria in WP:Fiction. --Gavin Collins 22:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/Merge per FrozenPurpleCube's recommendation above. The text could use a thorough edit as well. Rray 12:04, 26 August 2007 (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.