Deletion of Giant (Clash of Clans)

Comment: all as  failing  with exclusively primary sources. Redirects are pointless as the main article has no extra information. A list of classes would not have enough properly sourced content to warrant a split from main article. —&nbsp;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:GAMECRUFT||WP:GNG)

Comment: all per , , . Each topic lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. Wikipedia is a not a gameguide. Trivial things like units in a video game are not significant enough for independent articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GAMECRUFT||WP:GAMEGUIDE)

Comment: After this AfD closes in a couple of days, I suggest the category be speedy-deleted under .  In my opinion, it would certainly qualify as uncontroversial maintenance, and I don't see anything there disqualifying it from G6.  Nominating it for CfD would be a waste of editor time, in my opinion.  It is, of course, the closer's call on what to do about it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:G6)

Comment: These articles are simply |game cruft
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:GAMECRUFT)