Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labelas Enoreth

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 to List of Dungeons & Dragons deities. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Labelas Enoreth

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

While it appears in a handful of works within the D&D fiction, most of these appear to be passing mentions. Certainly this is not one of the core characters in the fiction. A slightly expanded coverage at List of Forgotten Realms deities should suffice. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of Forgotten Realms deities. No significant coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources, topic fails to establish notability and thus doesn't deserve a stand-alone article per WP:GNG.Folken de Fanel (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge into List of Dungeons & Dragons deities; this character is not Forgotten Realms specific. BOZ (talk) 14:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no third party independent sources for this fictional deity: fails WP:N. delete or if there is deemed appropriate content and an appropriate target article, merge. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into List of Dungeons & Dragons deities unless and until significant coverage comes up for this relatively minor deity. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 04:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BOZ, as there is disagreement over the appropriate merge target, and no one is arguing that there is no appropriate merge target, which is in line with WP:ATD. Jclemens (talk) 06:26, 7 September 2013 (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.