Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons/Forgotten Realms/Closure

Origin

I drafted this proposal after communication with a former member of the project; see here: [1]. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I saw the prods, and would like to have some influence on this discussion --as a general Wikipedia reader with no particular knowledge or interest in the subject. By analogy with other fictions and other subjects, wouldn't the locations, for example, better be merged and redirected? DGG (talk) 03:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, what we're currently having here is a large number of articles which consist entirely of plot summary - not by accident, but they were meant to be that way. Simply copy-paste merging won't work (it would result in a large "garbage dump" article, which happens only too often, but doesn't help anybody I think). Maybe someone with detail knowledge of the game could create a good abstracted list, also focusing on the encyclopedic, real-world aspects of the places and characters - provided that there is enough material, and that anybody is at all interested in doing this. But apparently all the original authors have left for Wikia, and continued their work there. (See discussion on my talk page.) Nothing has happened to these articles for months, or even years. So the best encyclopedic coverage we can achieve at the moment is restricting to the article Forgotten Realms, which seems to have some notability, and some associated lists which already exist. However, if you wish to go ahead... --B. Wolterding (talk) 05:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: If someone prefers redirects to the lists over deletion, that's no problem either. But there have been cases where mass redirections to lists were considered disruptive; therefore I think the PROD process is more appropriate, it gives interested editors five days of time to respond. --B. Wolterding (talk) 08:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

mass prods similarly--the problem is mass anything. Actually, even the redirects are preferable to the eventual deletions under prod. alas, I dont have time to spend on this now, so perhaps the best thing is to change them to redirects, which makes future expansion easier if anyone wants to, since the stuff doesn't have to be undeleted. As I'm someone who often objects to removals of this sort of material, I think you could take this as consensus to the redirects. Anything reasonable as a compromise rather than have them clog up the works at Afd. DGG (talk) 16:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)