Deletion of Ankheg

Comment: No evidence that the fictional monster meets the |general notability guideline. The majority of the article is a |plot-only description of a fictional work and that which is not is merely its publication history, nothing to presume that the monster has reception or significance in #Notability|reliable third-party sources. I also believe that this is not an appropiate topic since |Wikipedia is not a complete exposition of all possible details and this is a minor monster in the ''Dungeons & Dragons'' game. The article is referenced with primary and tertiary sources and lacks reliable secondary sources independent of the subject to presume that it has notability to deserve a stand-alone article. As Reyk mentioned, random |Google hits is not the same as notability, as notability requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Trivial mentions in secondary sources (such as reviews of games) or detailed mentions in tertiary sources (such as gaming guides) are not evidence of notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PLOT||WP:V||WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:GHITS)