Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death watch beetle (Dungeons & Dragons)
and '''Redirect''' the resulting blank titles to the approprate monster lists. I looked at every article here. Not ''one'' has any independent, reliable, secondary sources - or, for that matter, any secondary sources ''at all''. TSR, WotC, Pazio, ''Dragon'' magazine,  the pubisher of Tomb of Horrors - these are are all primary sources. While primary sources are inded acceptable for the establishement of facts, they can ''not'' be used to establish notability. No notability of ''any'' sort is established here - and, in fact, it cannot. Only a very few of the most iconic D&D monsters - beholders, mind flayers, and the like - are notable enough to have sufficent secondary sources to pass . These creatures have little to no "presence" outside of the game itself; there are simply no |reliable, secondary sources that ''could'' be used to establish any form of notabiity. As a ''group'', they are notable enough for inclusion in the lists of monsters, but ''invidivually'', the are not, and cannot become, notable enough for stand-alone articles
— User:The, 23:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Notability)