Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Comics and animation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Comics and animation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Comics and animation. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...


 Scan for comics AfDs

Scan for animation AfDs
Scan for webcomics AfDs
Scan for comics Prods
Scan for animation Prods
Scan for webcomics Prods
Scan for comics template TfDs
Scan for animated series template TfDs

Related deletion sorting

Comics and animation

Justine Hammer

Justine Hammer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Entirely in universe stuff. Redirection keeps getting reverted so to AfD we go. I think this was originally a redirect to Crimson Cowl but then the content there got taken off there and put here? I'm confused but this article as is does not pass NFICTION or GNG. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Belasco (cartoonist)

Belasco (cartoonist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear in any RS, may not be notable PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Szwimer

Jason Szwimer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Coverage is limited. A few major publications wrote about his podcast, but all around the same time when it first launched so it's basically all advertisements and not particularly substantial. His name also comes up in coverage of the end of Arthur because it was announced in an episode of the podcast, but none of the coverage is focused on him or the podcast. NACTOR asks for "significant roles in multiple notable [projects]" (emphasis mine), and it seems to me that he only has one. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spy Pictures

Spy Pictures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources to establish notability, making it unsuitable for inclusion per Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kori King

Kori King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Can't find in-depth coverage of this person; all coverage seems to be about the season of a TV show that they're on. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 02:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She is quite literally still airing on the show, the article is obviously going to expand more until the show stops airing or she is eliminated. In addition, she is a well-rounded performer who has a lot more to offer than simply her run on a television show. There is no reason to delete this article.
The nomination stems from a person whose name is a wikipedia page with less content than the Kori King page... so... maybe just maybe this stems from a negatively minded conservative and not a real care towards Wikipedia guidelines. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:F983:1BB7:F09E:CFA1 (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Huh??? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 13:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're seriously going to try to make us believe that this article -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanahary- (which I am POSITIVE garners less views than Kori-Acacia-Arrietty INDIVIDUALLY) which contains a grand total of 5 sentences, 1 quote (with no references?!) and 6 references is totally fine and worthy of being the inspiration for your editor name. Yet your in-depth targeting of queer culture is valid?
Huh??? 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's lay off on the character attacks; there is no reason to assume User:Zanahary has a negative bias. Would a "negatively-minded" person be contributing to articles like Mpreg and Transgender history? Just because you do not agree with their rationale does not mean you should belittle them. If anything, we should assume the user cares about the subject matter enough to be editing. Doughbo (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My initial comment contained a theory. These are not character attacks. The Zanahary article contains 5 sentences and 1 quote (without references) with a total of 6 references underneath them.
This user has been targeting drag queen pages for deletion which is a point blank fact. Why would I assume this user cares about the subject matter when they are attempting to delete pages about queens? 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also the edits can be summarized as eliminating the words *According to* and adding the terms *interprets [...] as* within the portion about the movie Alien for MPreg. For Transgender History the user added and . Much wow!
I have faith in the fact that drag queens deserve their Wikipedia pages because they are famous regardless of the perspective of 1 editor. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 19:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
so... maybe just maybe this stems from a negatively minded conservative and not a real care towards Wikipedia guidelines is an attack (by saying that they are WP:POVPUSHING), and even if it was just a theory, Casting aspersions is still considered a form of personal attack, and is thus prohibited on Wikipedia. I'm failing to see where you have rebutted they're actual points (that there's no coverage outside the show), instead simply repeating WP:ATAs like "they are famous" or the idea they'll be more notable in the future. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then I apologize for my theory being considered a personal attack.
For my information, how is this not POVPUSHING? The editor has targeted 3 currently popular drag queens' pages within a short amount of time. We're supposed to just assume that this is a jolly coincidence in this political climate? Love that..
WP:ENT should be sufficient here. No one from the Great British Bake-Off or Survivor went on to have tours and garner international success (from my knowledge, congratulations if anyone did honestly I'd hope they have their own Wikipedia page as it would be well deserved in the event this did occur).
Does their youtube channel with 1.5M views and counting, not count? Does their tiktok with a current figure of over 10M likes not count? This is a page for a famous entertainer, how is they are famous not a point of contention for the page to be maintained?
I don't care if I'm booted off of Wikipedia. I do care that there is an unfair amount of hate being sent towards a marginalized population, which is now affecting the standing of their wikipedia pages. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The editor has targeted 3 currently popular drag queens' pages within a short amount of time. We're supposed to just assume that this is a jolly coincidence until you have any sort of evidence, yes you are supposed to Assume good faith. It is not at all strange for somebody to notice a content area that has slipped through the cracks (so to speak) and nominate them for a wider (policy based) discussion. I seem to remember a similar "outcry" when somebody got around to applying policy based standards to Tolkien or wrestling articles.

As to your actual points: 1) You've failed to demonstrate how either point of WP:ENT is met (they haven't had roles in multiple Notable works and haven't, as far as I can see, made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment; something that would be demonstrated though sources saying so). 2) Does their youtube channel with 1.5M views and counting, not count? No, see WP:BIGNUMBER (and also maybe WP:YOUTUBER) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 21:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I've added several references to the article, a few of which even use the subject's name in the headline. Even if this entry were redirected now, we'd just be kicking the can down the road and the article would be recreated in a few weeks. Almost every single contestant who has appeared on RuPaul's Drag Race has a standalone entry because being cast practically guarantees notability. Kori King has already appeared on two independently notable TV series and will almost certainly be on Whatcha Packin' and Hey Qween! in the next few weeks. Combine this with additional press to be released in the coming weeks and beyond. Let's avoid the unnecessary redirect and encourage article expansion/improvement. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Three of these articles are coverage of Kori King, as opposed to articles which make mention of her in their coverage of other topics (Boston drag and RuPaul's Drag Race). Two are local news from Boston; one is an interview. An interview cannot establish notability, and neither of the Boston pieces are in-depth at all. She may meet notability soon, so this article can be moved to draftspace until she does. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Interviews can absolutely establish notability, per WP:Interviews#Notability. The question is whether the source is "marginal and only barely more than self published." Under this framework, the articles by Entertainment Weekly and Out should be considered valid supplementary material. Doughbo (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep the article per WP:ENT but remove the snippet about the local show. The citation points to an event posting, not an article, which is not notable. Furthermore, there is no point in listing local appearances as drag queens will headline dozens of these a year; it is not newsworthy. No need to make useless additions to appease a critic. Doughbo (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article does meet WP:GNG with numerous independent sources detailing her career as a drag queen prior and during her current appearance on RuPaul's Drag Race. The article cites, Entertainment Weekly, The Boston Globe, Out, and Queerty as independent sources that detail her performances in the Boston drag scene and as a reality television contestant. Every other contestant from Season 17 of RuPaul's Drag Race has a Wikipedia page, establishing a precedent that would make it unusual to delete this page. 70.30.55.29 (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where are all these voters with no understanding of notability policy getting this "unusual" verbiage? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:06, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons listed here and my other statements on this page Flubberpuff (talk) 02:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I agree that this subject meets notability guidelines. There are plenty of sources. This seems to be a page that is in the process of being built. Once the page edits plateau, then we can talk about long-term notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gravel for breakfast (talk • contribs) 19:06, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This AFD has been talked about on multiple subreddits ([2], [3]) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:56, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Merge to RuPaul's Drag Race season 17, as the only sources I'm seeing are about that season's cast being revealed or events during that season. If the page creator, user:Gravel for breakfast or anybody else wants this draftified until such sources appear, I would be open to that too. But we don't keep article's on the changes that sources will surely appear at some point in the future (see WP:CRYSTAL and WP:ATA#CRYSTAL). Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 21:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I see your point, but looking back at contestants from previous seasons at random, every one of them has a BLP wiki page. Many of those have less info than Kori King has now. See Joey_Jay_(drag_queen) for example. It seems out of place to me to zero in on this page for deletion. If this is the standard for deletion, we have a lot of work to do to go back and delete all the drag race contestant pages with this amount (or less) of information and sourcing.Gravel for breakfast (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is really not a policy-based argument, and if Joey Jay doesn’t meet GNG either, I’ll nominate his page for deletion, too. In fact, if you know he doesn’t, you should go ahead and do it yourself. That a topic area is bloated with articles for non-notable subjects (and I’m not saying RPDR is—but that’s the argument you’re making here) is neither remarkable nor reason to ignore or relax notability requirements. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 23:32, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Being cast on Rupaul's Drag Race essentially guarantees notability per WP:ENTERTAINER. As a multiple-emmy winning, internationally airing and supported television show with millions of fans per episode.
    The fact that you individually may not be entertained, does not take away from that. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Future notability, probably. But not yet. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:28, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And what precisely makes you believe that she is not yet notable based on this, when it has historically been more than sufficient for every single queen of every single previous season?
    She has a popular youtube channel with currently over 1.5M views.. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Because time advances such that unrealized effects of present phenomena have not yet occurred. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What a beautiful series of words that do not in any way negate the fact that Kori King is currently a notorious figure for her popular online presence paired with her currently competing on a large-platform television show aired internationally. 2607:FA49:9C3E:4400:2DFB:DF3D:EA57:C17F (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You simply asserting that they are a notorious figure isn't actually what is required by either WP:GNG or WP:ENT, neither is being on a on a large-platform television show (I mean, do you honestly believe that we have articles on everybody who has competed on The Great British Bake Off or Survivor etc.). In fact, WP:BLP1E makes it quite clear that somebody notable for only one thing doesn't need a standalone article. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Having a well sourced article about a notable contestant on a very popular TV show makes Wikipedia better. If people are looking up the Drag Race season, it makes sense that a popular entertainer from that show would have a BLP page. There is no problem to be fixed here. Everyone can move along. Gravel for breakfast (talk) 20:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If they are only noteworthy (according to the coverage in WP:RSs) for being on a season of a reality show, then they don't need a separate article as they are only notable for one event. I can assure you that our coverage of the vast majority very popular TV show[s] manages just fine without every single contestant (who are only covered for appearing on the show) having a separate article. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 21:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's the thing -- the contestants aren't only on one season of one series. They are on multiple independently notable shows, so I don't see how WP:BLP1E applies. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I’m very dubious about the idea that anyone on RPDR is automatically on multiple notable shows and thus meets ENT—Untucked is a supplement to the show, as is Whatcha Packin (which Kori has not ever appeared on). That’s a stretch of the criterion, which definitely doesn’t mean to presume notability of everyone who’s been on America’s Next Top Hatmaker, America’s Next Top Hatmaker: Behind the Scenes, and America’s Next Top Hatmaker: Extended Cut. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 02:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't recommend spending too much more time/energy trying to delete biographies for Drag Race contestants. Again, there's good reason almost all of the 220+ contestants across 17 seasons have entries. ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are very weird for specifically going after people from this show. This seems more like an agenda than a concern over “notability requirements” considering your post history. This is such a bizarre thing to do. 76.78.191.34 (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doomquest

Doomquest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I was hoping to work on this one, but the only significant coverage I can find is one listicle about it on Comic Book Resources. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Patriot

Iron Patriot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another fictional (comic) "exoskeleton"-cum-character that is is pure plot summary and list of apperances. My BEFORE shows some hits, but I what I see is pure plot summary - although I was hoping to find some discussion, as some similar 'dark/nationalist' heroes occasionally get academic writeups. Maybe someone will have better luck; if not, this should be redirected (or slightly merged) somewhere (probably to list of Marvel Universe characters, or maybe Features of the Marvel Universe, if folks feel this is more of a gadget than a character...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Norman Osborn the first user of the armor. His article covers the Patriot most extensively, and given the Patriot isn't really a "character", it's likely better redirected here than to a character list, similarly to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sorcerer Supreme (2nd nomination).
A hatnote can be included linking to War Machine's article, similarly to how Red Hood was handled after his AfD, since Rhodes is the other most significant user of the armor, having used it for an entire comic series. The other users seem to use the Armor more as a footnote; Garza, from what I can gather, doesn't even use the Patriot armor, and is instead paired with Rhodes's Patriot, while Ho seems to only use it for a brief span of issues, and not as a consistent identity like the other two. Carter's usage seems to have been only for an issue. Thus, I doubt any further disambiguation is necessary; if the Patriot armor is linked, it can be linked to Osborn's article, which gives the greatest amount of depth on what the Patriot armor is. Unopposed to a vice versa swap on if the primary target should be Rhodes while Osborn is the secondary target, but this just fails notability and is likely better covered as part of a primary topic. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Spider

Iron Spider (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional... exoskeleton? Really? Sigh. Well, it's probably just a badly written lead. Realistically, this is a fictional character (per WP:DUCK :P). Regardless, it seems like a niche comic book non-notable character; the article is the usual plot summary+list of appearances, with no reception/analysis. My BEFORE fails to find anything. Assuming we agree this is a character, it should be merged to list of Marvel Universe characters; otherwise, probably to Features of the Marvel Universe (since we don't have Technology of the Marvel Universe article). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. Given Iron Spider isn't a "character" per se, I feel it's likely better redirected to a primary topic. The two best options are likely Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe), who uses a variant of the armor extensively, or to Ultimate Spider-Man (TV series), where the Iron Spider is the identity used by one of the main characters. I have no preference to either, since both are solid targets. Alternatively, it can be mentioned at Alternative versions of Spider-Man, since this is technically an alternate version. I have no preference, but I'll let further consensus decide what is best. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:39, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Pokelego999. There isn't WP:SIGCOV for this as a separate character (because it isn't). I am neutral on the redirect target (but Spider-Man is as good as any). Shooterwalker (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murderworld (comics)

Murderworld (comics) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional location. Pure plot summary and list of appearances; no WP:GNG visible in the article (no reception/analysis), nothing in my BEFORE. At best, WP:ATD-R suggests we can redirect this to Features of Marvel Universe or such. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:59, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per above. Good target. Even if this was technically notable this is probably better per NOPAGE. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miho (Sin City)

Miho (Sin City) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor comic character. The usual issues with WP:GNG - article is a plot summary + list of appearances; reception is very short (just two listicles). My BEFORE is of no help. WP:ATD-R gives us a plausible target: List of Sin City characters. (If anyone is interested in this series, note I've justed PRODed a bunch of characters/organizations; others will be nominated for AfD - right now I am not seeing any GNG for anything fictional from Template:Sin City. Feel free to deprod and redirect stuff to the list of characters, of course (or we can discuss them here). I am bringing Miho to AfD to notify folks interested in this (and also because she has the most references out of all of the Sin City articles, so it seems she is the 'best' out of this sorry bunch of, let's face it, WP:FANCRUFT). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roxxon Energy Corporation

Roxxon Energy Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from the Marvel Universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of the Marvel Universe. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cross Technological Enterprises

Cross Technological Enterprises (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company most prominently related to Ant-Man. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of the Marvel Universe or Darren Cross (fictional founder, has its own article)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alchemax

Alchemax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from Spider Man universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of Spider-Man media if that article is kept (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of Spider-Man media); otherwise perhaps to (recently kept) Features of the Marvel Universe? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or weak merge with Features of the Marvel Universe (per WP:PRESERVE but that ain't important). Most of the sources are primary sources (from comics). The four that are reliable have almost no significant coverage of the company. brachy08 (chat here lol) 02:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parker Industries

Parker Industries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from Spider Man universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; reception limited to two listicles). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of Spider-Man media if that article is kept (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of Spider-Man media); otherwise perhaps to (recently kept) Features of the Marvel Universe? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:15, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luna Snow

Luna Snow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So after discovering this article, I wanted to do a hard dive into sources on it. However, upon digging...there's really next to nothing. Several articles are addressing the fact people thought she was a new character in Marvel Rivals, but they are carbon copies of one another: explaining the character's origin and usage, with no reception or discussion about her as a character itself. This article from Polygon felt like the strongest source, and what got my interest piqued to check for more, but even it barely discusses her, and is more about Iron Fist's redesign and Rivals.

Scholar also turned up nothing. She's a character in a vacuum, and while I'd rather be proven wrong I just can't find anything through a thorough WP:BEFORE to indicate she's notable. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Video games, and Comics and animation. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no immediate comment on deletion yet, but I am opening the possibility of a list of Marvel Rivals characters (comparable to the Overwatch one) given that they have spoken about including less well-known characters from the Marvel cannon, where notability outside of the game is unlikely. Most of the heroes in Rivals are notable before the game (even Jeff) but I am sure we'll see more. — Masem (t) 16:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't know if a list is really necessary compared to a table in the game's article for now, but once the cast grows I could see it as a good idea to do such a list.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that there is enough coverage of heroes as in the game to do a list with two paragraphs for each, one briefly summarizing the Canon of the character, and a second to cover their skill kit, as is done for the Overwatch ones. Judging by how the new heroes have been covered. This would also recent excessive game details on the individual char articles. But still thinking this through. — Masem (t) 20:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep [4] [5] [6] [7] (game guides can still qualify as SIGCOV as long as the article itself is not) as well as the other sources shown in the article, make me feel like this character is probably notable on her own. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There is sufficient coverage such as MSN, DEXERTO, Kotaku, Polygon, TechRadar etc. Drushrush (talk) 16:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • The first source is useless, it's a short note about fans of a niche game being upset about a price of a cosmetic item featuring her. It has nothing to do with her outside her being part of the said cosmetic. Second source is a bit longer but again, it focuses on mechanics of her character in a game, it's mostly useless for us. Third is more reliable and longer but it is still about her video game character in that particular game. Fourth is again about the game, but it is reliable and it goes beyond mechanics to discuss some cultural stuff. Fifth is a review of the cosmetic. Sigh. I am sorry, but those sources are not about Luna Snow, they are about Luna Snow (Marvel Rivals character). If this is all we have, then sadly, we cannot warrant keeping an article on her, but we could write up an article on the video game version of her character. Weird, I know... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: as per 4 sources above. AgerJoy talk 18:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Drushrush: @Zxcvbnm: @AgerJoy: While gameguide material can be used to establish character notability, it still needs to assert some importance outside of the game itself i.e. players being attacked for using Symmetra in Overwatch for how poor hers was or outright using her a troll pick to frustrate players. None of that is indicated here. There is also next to no discussion of the character as a fictional character outside of the Polygon article above, which is what we should be aiming for first and foremost. One needs to consider what the sources are saying for WP:SIGCOV, not that they simply exist.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. I do my best to look for any angle to justify an article's creation, but here, I find it uncompelling that all the sources are a combination of game guide discussion and/or offer limited commentary. I don't think it's a weak article situation, I've seen worse, but I would be more comfortable if there were stronger articles to cite. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect (and/or merge) per my analysis of sources above. What we have is mostly about video game character, not about the comic book character... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep – The deletion rationale does not account for Luna Snow’s broader multimedia presence, which establishes her notability beyond just Marvel Rivals. She is a playable character in five different video games (Marvel Future Fight, Marvel Super War, Marvel Snap, Marvel Puzzle Quest, Marvel Rivals), has appeared in the new animated series Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, and has released more than five officially licensed songs. Additionally, Luna Snow is one of the very few Korean superheroes in Marvel Comics, making her significant in terms of representation and diversity. Existing references in the article already discuss this aspect, further reinforcing her significance beyond her video game appearances. Furthermore, per WP:NFICTION, fictional characters can be considered notable if they have substantial independent coverage outside of plot summaries. While much of the current discussion focuses on game-related sources, her presence across multiple mediums suggests that she has had lasting impact. Additional coverage should be incorporated rather than outright deletion. If necessary, the article should be improved rather than removed. – Pokedigi (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Pokedigi: While I get that, even looking up those alternate media outlets doesn't seem to provide any commentary on her as a character in terms of WP:SIGCOV. We need actual sources proving that she is discussed in secondary reliable sources, not that she simply exists. Otherwise you're basically arguing "sources must exist", no?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      The article currently contains over 50 references. Are you suggesting that none of them provide the level of reliability or depth required to justify its existence? If there are concerns about specific sources, they should be evaluated and, if necessary, removed or replaced rather than using their perceived weakness as grounds for deletion. It's unusual to see an article with this many citations flagged for deletion rather than improved. Pokedigi (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Having a large number of citations does not by itself make an article notable or worthy of being separate from a main topic. To demonstrate why:
      1. Number of primary sources: 35
      2. Number of routine sources: 35
      In total, the article uses 80 sources, 70 of which are either routine coverage of announcements related to the character or primary sources. So, a total of 10 sources, and even then, I was pretty conservative with calling sources "routine." For instance, "Marvel Rivals: Who is Luna Snow?" many would consider this routine coverage, same with "Who is Luna Snow in Marvel? Powers, origins, and more explained." If we eliminated such articles that just give an explanation of the character, we're down to 7. Now, let's examine these 7 sources:
      1. An actually interesting piece titled "A Spider-Verse Hero's Friendship Shows the Importance of New Perspectives"
      2. A review of Marvel's Voices that expresses excitement about her appearing
      3. An article about the team she belongs to that doesn't talk about her in any significant way
      4. An article listing pop stars who should be in the MCU, with Luna only given mild coverage
      5. An article including a passing mention of a cameo in Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
      6. Another article including a passing mention of a cameo in Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
      7. A brief mention by Luna of enjoying voicing the character
      Of these sources, I would say that only one talks about her in any significant depth, the first one, while the others provide minimal coverage, except for the review of Marvel's Voices, which lands somewhere in between.
      Simply put, this is why having a large number of sources tells us nothing about a subject's notability. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, a second-stringer character to be sure but per earlier comments there is sufficient coverage in secondary sources to meet NOTE. Morgan695 (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you identify what you think the three strongest sources are, either in the article or linked in the AfD? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge/redirect supporters are rebutting the sources in the article and offered by the keeps, and while there are more "keeps" than !votes for other outcomes I wouldn't call it a consensus yet. Perhaps a source assessment would be beneficial for other editors?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toby the Tram Engine

Toby the Tram Engine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dubious stand-alone WP:GNG (my BEFORE also failed to find anything except a passing mention here and there). No reception or analysis, the only non-plot content is found the the "Prototype and backstory" but it seems to be cobbled from WP:SIGCOV-failing mentions, mostly by the show's creator; and it is padded by general history of the real world J70 tram engine (aka GER Class C53). Per ATD I recommend redirecting this to List of characters in The Railway Series; perhaps with a merge of few relevant sentences from the non-plot section. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: notability and popularity of this article is attested by the large number of pages linking to it (see 'What links here'). Redirecting to List of characters in The Railway Series would necessarily obliterate virtually all of the content.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mean as custard (talk • contribs) 06:52, February 19, 2025 (UTC)
I am afraid this argument, a variation of WP:GOOGLEHITS (but on Wikipedia) is not going to get much traction - our standards are much higher than 10-15 years ago where such arguments were considered valid. See WP:ITSPOPULAR. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. This character is perhaps the most recognizable in the series after Thomas. Use of primary references, while raising eyebrows, doesn't necessitate deletion. I do agree with you that this page could use a cleanup though to remove some of the fluff. Kylemahar902 (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Kloor

Harry Kloor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads a lot like a resume, tangentially mentioned in a few RS. Article may have been made for payment. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Live and learn. Here's what happened, and a good learning curve on this one. The article was created in 2008. It wasn't until 2022 that it was tagged for possible paid editing. With a gap of 14 years, how would anyone know it was paid editing? You see, when articles get tagged for anything, and without any backup proof, a tag is just a tag unless there is some proof. — Maile (talk) 03:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow me, please, to disagree with your observation about the importance of the length of time, i.e. "With a gap of 14 years, how would anyone know it was paid editing?" Well, information does not necessarily appear quickly. We might learn an article was made by a paid editor, or some other pertinent information, a considerable length of time after the article's creation, something for which I believe no examples need be given. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:17, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since subject despite the avalanche of citations, the supporting material does not stand up to close scrutiny. Scalpel, please.
Forensics: We can all agree that our subject is the first to obtain a double doctorate, per All the News That's Fit to Print, and by some obscure Russian website, for good measure - though, we must discard the dead links about that double doctorate stuff, such as this Arizona roadkill.
What else do we have? We have listings on a general theme, in which our subject is mentioned, such as this list of alumni, or routine listings of events, e.g. of speaking appearances, such as this; plus, news items that are similarly about something else and not of our subject, e.g. this report about an upcoming movie, whose screenplay is written by Kloor (mentioned once), or this one about a NASA project where our subject is listed as "workshop attendee", or a Captain's Log entry on a "Star Trek interactive science exhibit" where our subject is name dropped once, and so on. Anything else trawled up belongs to the aforepresented categories.
The strong aroma of vanity, whether intentional or not, is not a problem. After all, anyone can see there is no need for two photo-portraits or that we do not get year of birth. Nor is the fact that a major curator of the text is a kamikaze account. The problem is that we do not have enough sources. And arguments to the tune "Oh, he's obviously notable" do not wash. -The Gnome (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravencroft

Ravencroft (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional prison from Marvel/Spiderman verse. Pure plot summary and list of appearances. No reception, analysis, etc. The topic also has a section in Features of Spider-Man media (a problematic article that is currently discussed in its own AfD). I doubt we need even a single mention of this on Wikipedia outside a plot summary in some Spider-Man arc or comic; we certainly don't need two. This could be ATD-R to the mentioned article, but IMHO that one should be deleted as well, so... shrug. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Features of Spider-Man media. Though that article is up for AfD right now, the content will likely be merged to another article if merged, or kept around if kept, so I'm comfortable leaving a redirect here. Features of the Marvel Universe is also a decent merge target should that article be kept, but it's a bit up in the air right now given all these AfDs are active at the same time. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different proposed target articles right now. And the correct link to the Marvel AFD is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of the Marvel Universe (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Supermobile

Supermobile (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very minor element of the Superman universe; short article, pure plot summary and list of appearances. Fails WP:GNG. No idea where this could redirect, but always open to consider redirection a viable alternative to hard deletion (closer, please note: if anyone suggests a target, consider me to support it). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant delete unless a merge target can be found. There's not really a good merge target for this. Perhaps to Superman#Merchandising given the one source mentioned here mentions it was used exclusively for that purpose? But even so it'd be a brief sentence. This is an extremely minor universe element, so there's not much to be retained here. If a good merge target is found I'll change my vote to merge, so ping me if something changes. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:56, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 14:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buzz (DC Thomson)

Buzz (DC Thomson) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I redirected based on there being only a database source. This was undone, and a new source (this book) was added. That book comes from an author and publisher who do not seem to be notable as I can barely find any info on either, and the book itself appears to be full of reprinted comics and no valuable prose. There's also little to suggest notability of this subject, nor the few bluelinked strips listed here. This appears to be a subject of very niche interest, and probably not something that would've gotten a ton of coverage. I would stick with the redirect to The Topper (comics). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is a short running comic (not even 2 years starting in 1973) but it was being reprinted (and advertised on the front cover) as part of Classic of the Comics up until 2010. That's near 40 (not continuous) years as part of national publications. I know the source I added isnt the best but its more than just reprinted comics, its a complete index of the Topper comic that Buzz merged into. I'm going to have a look for more sources. Eopsid (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some more sources, I think there are more out there in other books. Eopsid (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Kibble-White's Ultimate Book of British Comics has something like 4 pages on it, Gifford's Character Encyclopedia probably covers half-a-dozen plus strips (with his two catalogues possibly good for the odd cite), it might be covered in Cadogan's DCT book (been a while since I read that one) and all of this is without bothering to look at any specialist magazines - Crikey! almost certainly ran at least one article on it. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if it absolutely has to be redirected somewhere because people don't like comics, the list of DC Thomson publications makes a lot more sense than to The Topper, which is just confusing. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Topper seems like a fine target to me since Buzz was merged into it, and that merger is mentioned in The Topper's lead. List of D. C. Thomson & Co. Ltd publications only mentions the name and years of publication, so it's less valuable in terms of how much information is supplied. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George DiCaprio

George DiCaprio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTINHERITED, George here is only known in connection with his famous son Leonardo DiCaprio. His "acting debut" is a very small few second cameo, his work as a writer/artist (not really clear) fails WP:ARTIST and his work as a filmmaker fails WP:FILMMAKER, getting a small stint editing on local newspapers does not make you notable. Source 5 in the article shows he's worked on... three comics? Don't know if it's even reliable as a source but clearly not noteworthy in itself. jolielover♥talk 14:54, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He stills fails WP:AUTHOR, as none of his work in the bibliography is notable. jolielover♥talk 03:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ. The entire underground comix movement was designed to change people's perceptions of what stories were "worth" telling in the comics format, so many products of that era fail a mainstream definition of "notablity". Nonetheless, the material produced during that era changed the comics industry forever, heralding the alternative comics movement and the rise of the graphic novel. That history has been well established. DiCaprio's role during that time as a writer, publisher, editor, and distributor is also well-established. Not to mention that he collaborated with such "notable" artists as Justin Green and Jay Kinney, and contributed to anthologies such as Arcade and Slow Death. -- User:Mikeross22 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yours is an admirably expressive and nuanced opinion. However, our own take matters very little as far as a person's notability is concerned. Sources rule-The Gnome (talk) 20:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because there are at least three good sources. However, there are several sources that need to be removed and the article tagged as needing better sources, if it is kept. Bearian (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It isn't about the sources, obviously Leonardo DiCaprio's dad is going to have a plethora of articles about him no matter what he did. The issue is that he has no notability outside of being Leo's father. jolielover♥talk 05:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:38, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:39, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion

Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Comics_and_animation
No tags for this post.