Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Death knight - Knowledge

Source 📝

1206:– I have added a new reference today. This one was published on Tuesday, yes it is from Wizards, but it points to notability since the books talks about how they are using the Death Knight (complete with new art) in the new 4th Edition game. If the sales of the 3rd edition are any indication, then we can expect that nearly 3 million copies of the book with the new Death Knight (the Monster Manual) will be sold. I recommend that with this latest information, the article edits, the fact that the original AfD did not adequately address the article, and the overwhelming number of keep votes that this be upgraded to 1149:
myself would be nice) before there is nothing left on Knowledge at all, unless it is something known to everyone worldwide. sadly a site that could be used to provide much information on many subjects seems to be being castrated to only subjects that are popular or of worldwide media concern/coverage. information however is NOT limited to only what everyone knows, and a site like wikipedia should not be harmed that it cannot provide information on little thing that may be hard to find information anywhere else in this, what is it called? oh yes, the "Information Age".
1067:- I have now added 16 inline citations. 3 were from the article before, 4 are from WotC/TSR with one of those detailing the Death Knight in the upcoming 4th Edition game (it was a featured article on the new game) and 9 are from third party independent publishers. This is just the information in my personal library. I am tracking down a reference that might indicate that the Death Knight was based in part on the 828:; if the creators of other games had been influenced by this Dungeons and Dragons character, they would have stated this explictly - you cannot imply influence with providing evidence of this link. I am begining to believe that you are hiding behind references and weasel words in order to disguise the lack of real-world notability.-- 744:
That reviewer says that the Death Knight is "one of the more interesting additions in the book" can hardly be classed as reliable secondary source. For starters, that is hardly an assertion of notability; secondly it is a passing mention of the character in a review about another subject althogether.
894:
Plenty of reasons on this. Firstly, the nomination doesn't give a real reason for deletion, it simply says "not notable" without telling us why it's not. Secondly, the article goes beyond game guide information (just because it's from a game doesn't mean it's game guide). Thirdly, all of Knowledge
753:
is sadly misplaced. What is needed is more than just a mention in a telephone directory; some analysis, context, critism, details of the characters origins, development. Instead there is long list of instances where the character has appeared in books. This stock character is going to pop up in lots
1143:
the nominator should research what the article is about rather than jump to a conclusion about it, so based on the reason for deletion i say keep the article. also based on the fact that this entity is in many notable works, such as best selling novels as well as sourcebooks for the game itself, it
776:
opinions for are kept, so you might reassess your opinion. At any rate, I'd request that you comment on the issues related to the article rather than making things personal and condescendingly denigrating my understanding of policies here. This discussion is about whether or not this article should
692:
will make appear many times in multiple games and books - this is not in dispute; what is the issue here is did the appearance amount to anything notable: was the character given an important role, for instance, or did he make an important speech. I think you have proven that this stock character
1148:
at the rate many of these notability tags are popping up, i could find thousands of things on Knowledge that i have never heard of. would that mean they are not notable to everyone, or just myself? again i think the issue of notability needs to be addressed or explained to some people (including
440:
describes this fictional character perfectly. For instance, the intro to this article describles him as "a death knight", rather than giving him a name. The name does not really make a difference as they are all interchangeable; you can refer to him as the "Black Knight", "Evil Knight" or "Dark
818:
I admit that I am not a PhD in role-playing games, but I can differentiate between primary and secondary sources. For example, a (disputed) assertion has been made in the article that the Death Knight has "influences" on other games. I dispute this statement of fact as it is unsupported by any
1240:
The outcomes of AFDs are not determined by a vote count. An AFD with a deletion nomination rooted in policy and 20 keep votes that were against policy would be (properly) closed as delete. I'm not saying there isn't consensus to keep here, just saying that it doesn't come from sheer numbers.
1186:
article well referenced, well written and shows notability. The nominator and his sidekick are clearly out of their depth here--they make glaring factual mistakes in their statements and, which is more troubling, refuse to be corrected--the assumption of good will can only stretch so far.
687:
Easy to say but difficult to prove. If you look at the references you have added, you can see that they support the content related to the primary sources; that is where the is an instance of a Death Knight, you have added a reference. However, we already know that
540:
Notability is the real issue, not whether or not this is a stock character. Some stock characters are notable; some are not. If you want to argue that being a stock character is a valid reason for deletion, you should bring that up on the talk page for the policy.
640:
None of the references given provide any evidence of notability, nor do they assert any; they are primary sources that show that this stock character appears in many publications; none of them assert that the character is notable
823:
of the same name, but using the same character is not the same as having a direct influence on the designers or creators of a game and none of the sources you have provide proves this. The sources you have provided are
929:- What with all the "needs work!" templates at the head of that page, I would suggest someone sit down and address those concerns. If the article is still not worth keeping around at that time, scrap it. 601:
The sources provided at the time of writing are neither reliable secondary sources nor do they assert any notability; all of them refer to primary sources in which the stock character is mentioned. --
441:
Knight" (otherwise known as "Night Knight"). You will find lots of trivial sources on the internet mentioning the Death Knight, because when it comes to stock characters, one name fits all.--
795:
More to the point Gavin your opinion here is only that, your opinion, not policy. And until you actually read the sources for notability I have put here it is at best an uninformed opinion.
912:
Per Web Warlock and others. The existence of multiple reliable sources indicates notability. AfD isn't the appropriate venue to discuss a merge; that's what article talk pages are for.
562:
Here might be a good place to disuss the notabilty of this character. Other than making appearances in lots of game guides, what do you think give this stock character notablity? --
339: 115: 150:
magazine, which in turn seems to have a nice stack of awards for an RPG magazine. Did you discuss other options with anyone else or ask if other sources are available? --
989:. "Fangz" should probably stick to topics he knows something about, or at the very least bother to read the articles in question. Knowledge works better that way. -- 220:
Sure I do, but there seems to have been a surprising amount of confusion lately over that "game guide" bit: As you see from that link, it's specifically about game
619:
I see multiple reliable secondary sources asserting notability. The consensus here and on the talk page of the article will determine the outcome at any rate.
247:
Game guides go beyond advice. For example, an article listing the hit points of every monster in a game is game guide content, yet does not offer any advice.
273: 719:
You commented earlier that all of these are primary sources. That's incorrect; several of the sources listed are from secondary sources.
303:- There are references and mythological antecedents in various stories. Given 24 hours I could find quite a few new references for it. 1226:
We have two votes for delete (including the nom), one "rework", and fourteen keeps. If that's not consensus, I don't know what is.
393:
You know. Every time you say that I come up with about 5-7 independent sources. Currently I getting ready to go over the works of
88: 83: 92: 17: 1006:
per Webwarlock, per Poisonink, per whomever you choose, really. As D&D monsters go, this is one of the more notable ones.
486:
The use of the term "stock character" is irrelevant anyway, since being a stock character isn't a valid reason for deletion.
1158: 75: 237: 159: 1371:- The article in its original form was of quite doubtful notability, but the sources added seem more than enough. 1398: 180: 177: 36: 1397:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1109:
Per multiple references. Also publication history & influences section add out of universe notability.--
1093: 1054: 833: 759: 706: 650: 606: 567: 527: 446: 380: 350: 174: 284: 191: 130: 666:- I seriously doubt you have read any of these so your comment is little more than opinion or guesswork. 1380: 1349: 1331: 1314: 1300: 1286: 1268: 1254: 1235: 1219: 1196: 1178: 1161: 1135: 1118: 1114: 1097: 1080: 1058: 1032: 1015: 998: 981: 956: 938: 921: 904: 858: 837: 804: 786: 763: 732: 710: 675: 654: 628: 610: 589: 580:
Multiple references to reliable sources indicate notability. See the references section in the article.
571: 550: 531: 495: 479: 450: 428: 410: 384: 354: 329: 312: 294: 260: 242: 215: 201: 164: 140: 57: 1376: 1343: 1327: 1296: 1280: 1264: 1248: 1215: 1192: 1076: 968:
per Webwarlock. "Fangz" should read articles before putting them up for AfD--this article is about a
952: 900: 854: 800: 671: 522:, I think this article is well covered on fansites and other game focused sites to be listed here. -- 406: 308: 254: 211: 1028: 994: 424: 1131: 1089: 1050: 1011: 977: 934: 829: 777:
be deleted; it's not about whether or not I understand the policies and guidelines here. Thanks.
755: 702: 646: 602: 563: 523: 475: 442: 394: 376: 346: 849:- If you have issues with it, then do the research yourself to confrim or deny the claims here. 1154: 279: 186: 125: 79: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1110: 689: 508: 122:
A RPG class which is not notable. This should be merged into a list of classes, or deleted.
53: 1169:
article now establishes notability. Thanks go to webwarlock, rray and others. Good job!
1372: 1338: 1323: 1292: 1275: 1260: 1243: 1211: 1188: 1174: 1072: 1046: 948: 896: 850: 820: 796: 667: 512: 437: 416: 402: 372: 304: 249: 232: 207: 154: 206:
Not to be overly nit-picky, but a Death Knight is not a class as you have described it.
1024: 990: 917: 782: 750: 728: 624: 585: 546: 519: 491: 420: 368: 1310: 1231: 1127: 1007: 973: 930: 471: 325: 170: 1259:
Which is why I focused on the research, citations, and edits first and votes last.
1150: 746: 515: 364: 71: 63: 1322:
then why am I so sleepy? ;) Thanks everyone else as well! I am just glad to help.
1305:
And, several of the Keep votes came as a result of WebWarlock's tireless efforts.
109: 1042: 49: 895:
policies appear to be followed. I simply cannot see a reason for deletion. --
1170: 229: 151: 913: 778: 724: 620: 581: 542: 487: 645:. For all of the 2,600 other characters, you will find similar sources. -- 470:. So please pay attention--your refusal to do so is making you look bad.-- 1306: 1227: 772:
My understanding of policies here is fine. Most of the article I provide
321: 1068: 754:
of places, but outside of those sources, there is no notability. --
1391:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
397:
who, if I remember correctly, had a Death Knight like figure in
183:. There is a lot more, but I don't feel like listing them all. 514:
which are used in Dungeons and Dragon games. Unless there are
401:
and it was sited in other works as being an influence.
105: 101: 97: 1291:
No worries. I just wanted to make sure I understood.
1041:
all the sources listed are TSR/WotC. Hence it fails
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 518:to demonstrate why this character has real-world 415:And it would be nice if you could use terms like 340:list of Game-related-related deletion discussions 1401:). No further edits should be made to this page. 375:oustide of Dungeons & Dragons game guides.-- 1088:now there are sufficient third-party sources. 819:evidence. There may be other games with the a 947:I'll be doing exactly that tomorrow morning. 697:in many fictional worlds, but not that he is 8: 972:, not a class--the infobox even says that.-- 1049:, unless third-party sources can be found. 507:That is debatable. There are over 2,600 338:: This debate has been included in the 272:Note: This debate has been added to the 745:I am afraid that your understanding of 146:Well, this has a number of mentions in 7: 462:: Just in case you haven't read it, 228:. It says it allows descriptions. -- 1144:is not obscure to be not notable. 24: 1273:My comment was directed to BOZ. 1023:as per Webwarlock, Masterzora. 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 399:The Empire of the Necromancers 1: 1381:23:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1350:18:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1332:17:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1315:17:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1301:17:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1287:17:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1269:14:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1255:23:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1236:19:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1220:18:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1197:21:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 1179:21:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 1162:00:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1136:22:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1119:18:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1098:07:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1081:18:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1059:07:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1033:04:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1016:04:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 999:01:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 982:00:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 957:01:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 939:23:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 922:23:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 905:23:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 859:17:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 838:17:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 805:01:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 787:01:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 764:23:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 733:23:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 711:22:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 701:per se in the real-world. -- 676:20:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 655:20:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 629:17:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 611:16:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 590:16:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 572:16:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 551:16:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 532:16:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 496:14:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 480:01:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 451:14:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 429:04:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 411:22:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 385:22:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 355:22:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 330:21:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 313:21:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 295:15:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 274:list of video game deletions 261:16:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 243:16:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 216:21:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 202:15:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 165:15:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 141:15:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 58:05:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 1336:Glad you did—good work WW. 1418: 1126:Per Webwarlock and others. 516:reliable secondary sources 365:reliable secondary sources 723:magazine is one example. 1394:Please do not modify it. 464:this article is about a 169:Remember that wikipedia 32:Please do not modify it. 511:listed by the publisher 1071:of myth and legend. 367:to demonstrate the 181:should be in a list 171:is not a game guide 1146:additional comment 395:Clark Ashton Smith 468:, NOT a character 357: 343: 320:per Web Warlock. 1409: 1396: 1346: 1341: 1283: 1278: 1251: 1246: 690:stock characters 509:stock characters 363:as there are no 344: 334: 297: 293: 290: 287: 282: 257: 252: 240: 235: 200: 197: 194: 189: 162: 157: 139: 136: 133: 128: 113: 95: 34: 1417: 1416: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1399:deletion review 1392: 1344: 1339: 1281: 1276: 1249: 1244: 826:primary sources 821:stock character 438:stock character 417:stock character 373:stock character 288: 285: 280: 277: 271: 255: 250: 238: 233: 195: 192: 187: 184: 160: 155: 134: 131: 126: 123: 86: 70: 67: 44:The result was 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1415: 1413: 1404: 1403: 1386: 1384: 1383: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1303: 1223: 1222: 1200: 1199: 1181: 1164: 1138: 1121: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1035: 1018: 1001: 984: 962: 961: 960: 959: 942: 941: 924: 907: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 870: 869: 868: 867: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 841: 840: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 792: 791: 790: 789: 767: 766: 736: 735: 714: 713: 679: 678: 658: 657: 632: 631: 614: 613: 593: 592: 575: 574: 554: 553: 535: 534: 499: 498: 483: 482: 454: 453: 413: 388: 387: 358: 332: 315: 298: 269: 268: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 218: 120: 119: 66: 61: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1414: 1402: 1400: 1395: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1367: 1366: 1351: 1348: 1347: 1342: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1302: 1298: 1294: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1285: 1284: 1279: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1253: 1252: 1247: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1224: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1208:Snowball Keep 1205: 1202: 1201: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1185: 1182: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1168: 1165: 1163: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1147: 1142: 1139: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1122: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1105: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1090:Percy Snoodle 1087: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1066: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1056: 1052: 1051:Percy Snoodle 1048: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1019: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1002: 1000: 996: 992: 988: 985: 983: 979: 975: 971: 967: 964: 963: 958: 954: 950: 946: 945: 944: 943: 940: 936: 932: 928: 925: 923: 919: 915: 911: 908: 906: 902: 898: 893: 890: 889: 860: 856: 852: 848: 845: 844: 843: 842: 839: 835: 831: 830:Gavin Collins 827: 822: 817: 814: 813: 806: 802: 798: 794: 793: 788: 784: 780: 775: 771: 770: 769: 768: 765: 761: 757: 756:Gavin Collins 752: 748: 743: 740: 739: 738: 737: 734: 730: 726: 722: 718: 717: 716: 715: 712: 708: 704: 703:Gavin Collins 700: 696: 691: 686: 683: 682: 681: 680: 677: 673: 669: 665: 662: 661: 660: 659: 656: 652: 648: 647:Gavin Collins 644: 639: 636: 635: 634: 633: 630: 626: 622: 618: 617: 616: 615: 612: 608: 604: 603:Gavin Collins 600: 597: 596: 595: 594: 591: 587: 583: 579: 578: 577: 576: 573: 569: 565: 564:Gavin Collins 561: 558: 557: 556: 555: 552: 548: 544: 539: 538: 537: 536: 533: 529: 525: 524:Gavin Collins 521: 517: 513: 510: 506: 503: 502: 501: 500: 497: 493: 489: 485: 484: 481: 477: 473: 469: 467: 461: 458: 457: 456: 455: 452: 448: 444: 443:Gavin Collins 439: 435: 432: 431: 430: 426: 422: 418: 414: 412: 408: 404: 400: 396: 392: 391: 390: 389: 386: 382: 378: 377:Gavin Collins 374: 370: 366: 362: 359: 356: 352: 348: 347:Gavin Collins 341: 337: 333: 331: 327: 323: 319: 316: 314: 310: 306: 302: 299: 296: 292: 291: 283: 275: 270: 262: 259: 258: 253: 246: 245: 244: 241: 236: 231: 227: 223: 219: 217: 213: 209: 205: 204: 203: 199: 198: 190: 182: 179: 176: 173:. Plus these 172: 168: 167: 166: 163: 158: 153: 149: 145: 144: 143: 142: 138: 137: 129: 117: 111: 107: 103: 99: 94: 90: 85: 81: 77: 73: 69: 68: 65: 62: 60: 59: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 1393: 1390: 1385: 1368: 1337: 1319: 1274: 1242: 1207: 1203: 1183: 1166: 1145: 1140: 1123: 1106: 1085: 1064: 1038: 1037: 1020: 1003: 986: 969: 965: 926: 909: 891: 846: 825: 815: 773: 741: 720: 698: 694: 684: 663: 642: 637: 598: 559: 504: 465: 463: 459: 433: 398: 360: 335: 317: 300: 278: 248: 225: 221: 185: 147: 124: 121: 72:Death knight 64:Death knight 45: 43: 31: 28: 1324:Web Warlock 1293:Web Warlock 1261:Web Warlock 1212:Web Warlock 1111:Cube lurker 1073:Web Warlock 949:Web Warlock 851:Web Warlock 797:Web Warlock 721:White Dwarf 668:Web Warlock 419:correctly. 403:Web Warlock 305:Web Warlock 224:, how-tos, 208:Web Warlock 1373:Goochelaar 1189:Freederick 897:Masterzora 369:notability 1025:Edward321 991:Poisonink 520:notablity 436:The term 421:Edward321 281:Fangz of 188:Fangz of 127:Fangz of 1320:tireless 1159:contribs 1128:Shemeska 1047:WP:RPG/N 1008:Iquander 974:Robbstrd 970:creature 931:Howa0082 742:Commment 472:Robbstrd 466:creature 371:of this 116:View log 1204:Comment 1151:shadzar 1065:Comment 847:Comment 816:Comment 751:WP:FICT 699:notable 685:Comment 664:Comment 638:Comment 599:Comment 560:Comment 505:Comment 460:Comment 434:Comment 89:protect 84:history 1069:draugr 1039:Delete 927:Rework 695:exists 643:per se 361:Delete 226:advice 222:guides 148:Dragon 93:delete 50:Canley 1345:shtak 1340:Pagra 1282:shtak 1277:Pagra 1250:shtak 1245:Pagra 1171:Hobit 747:WP:RS 256:shtak 251:Pagra 178:these 110:views 102:watch 98:links 16:< 1377:talk 1369:Keep 1328:talk 1311:talk 1297:talk 1265:talk 1232:talk 1216:talk 1193:talk 1184:Keep 1175:talk 1167:Keep 1155:Talk 1141:Keep 1132:talk 1124:Keep 1115:talk 1107:Keep 1094:talk 1086:Keep 1077:talk 1055:talk 1045:and 1043:WP:N 1029:talk 1021:Keep 1012:talk 1004:Keep 995:talk 987:Keep 978:talk 966:Keep 953:talk 935:talk 918:talk 914:Rray 910:Keep 901:talk 892:Keep 855:talk 834:talk 801:talk 783:talk 779:Rray 774:Keep 760:talk 749:and 729:talk 725:Rray 707:talk 672:talk 651:talk 625:talk 621:Rray 607:talk 586:talk 582:Rray 568:talk 547:talk 543:Rray 528:talk 492:talk 488:Rray 476:talk 447:talk 425:talk 407:talk 381:talk 351:talk 336:Note 326:talk 318:Keep 309:talk 301:Keep 212:talk 106:logs 80:talk 76:edit 54:talk 46:keep 1307:BOZ 1228:BOZ 342:. 322:BOZ 286:Blo 230:Kiz 193:Blo 175:all 152:Kiz 132:Blo 114:– ( 1379:) 1330:) 1313:) 1299:) 1267:) 1234:) 1218:) 1210:. 1195:) 1177:) 1134:) 1117:) 1096:) 1079:) 1057:) 1031:) 1014:) 997:) 980:) 955:) 937:) 920:) 903:) 857:) 836:) 803:) 785:) 762:) 731:) 709:) 674:) 653:) 627:) 609:) 588:) 570:) 549:) 530:) 494:) 478:) 449:) 427:) 409:) 383:) 353:) 328:) 311:) 289:od 276:. 214:) 196:od 135:od 108:| 104:| 100:| 96:| 91:| 87:| 82:| 78:| 56:) 48:. 1375:( 1326:( 1309:( 1295:( 1263:( 1230:( 1214:( 1191:( 1173:( 1157:| 1153:| 1130:( 1113:( 1092:( 1075:( 1053:( 1027:( 1010:( 993:( 976:( 951:( 933:( 916:( 899:( 853:( 832:( 799:( 781:( 758:( 727:( 705:( 670:( 649:( 623:( 605:( 584:( 566:( 545:( 526:( 490:( 474:( 445:( 423:( 405:( 379:( 349:( 345:— 324:( 307:( 239:r 234:o 210:( 161:r 156:o 118:) 112:) 74:( 52:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
deletion review
Canley
talk
05:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Death knight
Death knight
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Fangz of
Blood
15:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Kiz
o
r
15:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
is not a game guide
all
these
should be in a list
Fangz of
Blood

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.