Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape monsters

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. —

I've looked around at other MMORPG Wikis, and not one of them covered any of monsters. Why should this one? I vote a Delete per

• Delete more RuneSpace silliness.
  Danny Lilithborne 19:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, more cruft, lack of content likely failure of
  WP:NOT, game guidish etc per nom.--Andeh 21:41, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Hold on (although not necessarily keep) - I thought we were trimming, cleaning and merging this article into
  armour? Thats what everyone was talking about at Talk:RuneScape recently, if memory serves. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 23:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Upon checking,

  RuneScape combat. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 00:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  • Merge: Although RuneScape monsters should not be elaborated on because it's not encyclopedic content, basic info about the monsters should be placed in Combat per Captain Vindaloo.--
    talk c E 01:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Merge, move to wiki The RuneScape Wiki needs more articles, so relevant content should be put there, but this also belongs in combat.
    Hemhem20X6 03:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Merge whatever is deemed usable into Combat then delete. Little point in keeping the article beyond that purpose, it's either an ineffective (and arguably non-notable) stub or could be expanded to a game-guide style list, neither of which tie-in with what contributors are doing. QuagmireDog 23:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ironically, the latest RS update has changed the graphics of several generic monsters AND the kalphite queen. I've not seen how drastic these changes are but the two KQ animations may now be out-of-date, and I'm struggling to see what few sentences could be ported. It may will be there's nada to take except a the KBD image and perhaps a few others. QuagmireDog 22:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've still not seen the new KQ, but the giants and demons are profoundly different and improved compared to their old incarnations. The Chaos Elemental and KBD pictures are the only thing here that IMO are worth keeping for the combat article. QuagmireDog 00:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unnecessary. However, please do not move to the RuneScape Wiki. We don't need more crap.--Richard 21:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or whatever, but I hate it when people nominate for deletion when they mean "merge and redirect". I'm taking the images to the Wiki, though. It's the only thing this article has to offer. Hyenaste ^(tell) 22:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a place for fancruft and game guides. I can't figure out how this article is encyclopedic. Audacious One 04:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~(Keep)~ Wouldn't everybody think best if Wikipedia covered EVERYTHING like an encyclopedia since that is what Wiki is. If you don't need to read it...then don't look it up correct?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.26.221.66 (talk • contribs)

You should read What Wikipedia is not. This is fan stuff. It's not encyclopediec.--24.109.220.202 20:15, 1 September 2006 (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.