Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crawling claw

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters. RL0919 (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crawling claw

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails to establish notability. The only thing it has is a trivial, hyperfocused listicle that has no real worth. TTN (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above. The listicle is something, but not enough alone. I came across this, but it's probably not reliable. If I could be convinced it was, I think it might be in the "weak keep" category. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above. Article consists entirely of the appearance of crawling claws in DnD games, so a separate article is not necessary. JIP | Talk 11:16, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see the point of the list that the merger is proposed about. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect Its claim to notability is that it is one of the weakest D&D monsters? Not really much to say about it then, is there? – sgeureka ^t•c 05:59, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.