Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dungeons & Dragons deities
per . There are several independent sources used in the article — Ian Livingstone's ''Dicing with Dragons'', Philippe Bornet's ''Religions in play: games, rituals and virtual worlds'', and Lawrence Schick's ''Heroic Worlds: A History and Guide to Role-Playing Games'' — that are not acknowledged in the nomination. Some of the Keep voters above have not made specific reference to policy or sources, but I think they help to establish the common-sense judgment that the use of gods and demigods in ''Dungeons & Dragons'' is a worthwhile subject for analysis and study.{{pb}}That being said, I can see the nominator's point that this article is overwhelmingly a list of names and titles, and doesn't have enough human-readable content. But one reason why the article is so spare is because a lot of content about the various deities has been nominated for deletion in the last six months, and ended with a bare redirect to this article. (For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yondalla&oldid=930244049 Yondalla and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gruumsh&oldid=928301049 Gruumsh, among many, many others.) I think that the pattern of "redirect all the individual pages to a list, then nominate the list for deletion" does not give me confidence in other potential redirects and merges suggested in this discussion. If we merge this with Sources and influences on the development of Dungeons & Dragons, then Zxcvbnm can nominate ''that'' article, and so on.  says that the current state of an article does not diminish the notability of the topic, and it's clear that the use of deities in ''D&D'' is a notable topic. We should halt the bulldozer here
— User:Toughpigs, 20:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ARTN||WP:ARTN (Wikipedia:Notability)