Deletion of RuneScape combat

Comment: If it's anyway possible to merge the key facts of these articles into the main article itself, then these articles are not needed, because of the lack of . However, right now it would be a waste to delete the information found from these articles, so I propose keep until merge. Runescape as the main article needs improving at the moment, and if we are to push the article up to , having bits from these articles included in is not going to be too bad. Plus, the amount of limited use fair-use images used on these articles is going to be massive - we don't need in-game specification of every aspect in Runescape with fair-use images, as the main identification should only be done, what is the game, and not what's in the game
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:FA)

Comment: WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not a game guide or lists of endless information. For Gielinor, delete due to 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:FICT)

Comment: the last umpteen AfDs for that had the same or better deletion arguments and still ended in overwhelming keep. Until articles on characters are declared unencyclopedic by major policy changes and Gods is thrown in a mass nom, it's staying. '''Speedy keep Gielinor''' - no reason given for deletion. For the record, I'll say what I said last time: articles on fictional universes are encyclopedic. As for the rest: '''keep''' - ''these are not game guides'', no matter how many times someone keeps saying they are. These are no use to someone looking for a walkthrough to the game. Sometimes some slips past the local editors, it's easy enough to fix. Notability not being inherited doesn't apply, it refers to related but separate topics (like a player or developer, in this context). Notability doesn't apply, RuneScape easily demonstrates notability, and that it's components are notable as a result ''is'' a valid argument. If that wasn't a valid argument, there would be rampant holes in Wikipedia's coverage; Bill Gates' article would be forbidden from mentioning his upbringing and education. Notability not being inherited would apply to Gates' family, they aren't notable just because he is.  is a very real, valid concern. We are not talking about some little Flash game here, this is a full-fledged MMO with probably more history and at least as much content as the other major MMOs. If the main article needs cleaning up, please explain why it is GA rated
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SIZE)

Comment: completely inappropriate for a general encyclopedia. We should not have articles on in-depth game analysis ();  also applies
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:WAF)

Comment: this is not a how-to site, this is an encyclopedia.  and related polices make it clear that notability '''is not inherited'''. Just because RuneScape is notable does ''not'' mean everything related to RuneScape is. Please note that this is ''not'' a vote, and the "keep" comments need to be justified by policy, not by simply saying "keep" or "keep because insert your favorite non-policy reason. "It's popular" or "runescape is important" do not satisfy 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: this is stupid.  depends on the context. for current real life events, a source from cnn.com or bbc.co.uk is reasonable, but for this?  within the context of runescape, this is notable.  expecting everything to have sources of the same kind that the iraq war has is just asinine
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)