Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation

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:

Edit this page 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.
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:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation/archive

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

Helicarrier

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

This fails WP:SIGCOV. Most of the references are listicles that are either unreliable or not significant outside of discussions of Marvel and [S.H.I.E.L.D.]]. This could be redirected to S.H.I.E.L.D. with any passing mentions in sources that can be salvaged. Jontesta (talk) 20:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Jontesta (talk) 20:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edd Gould

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

I've been pondering on nominating this for AfD, and I've finally come to the conclusion that this article is not eligible for standalone notability and should either be deleted or merged into Eddsworld (if that article is even notable at this point with such sketchy sourcing). A WP:BEFORE search brings up obituary-style sources and passing mentions in articles. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Europe, and United Kingdom. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Internet. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: while i agree Eddsworld isn't sourced properly (and that it probably is impossible to source well given the mainstream media snobness about early-2000s internet culture), this article in particular seems pretty well sourced to me. That his notability mostly comes from the continuation of his work by Ridgewell (ie he became notable mostly posthumously) is irrelevant because he is notable. I think EddsWorld should be merged into etiher TomSka or this article, but that's not the subject.

Themoonisacheese (talk) 09:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't very many in-depth sources (including in the article) but I think there are just enough to support a short article on Gould or Eddsworld. However, most of the coverage is overlapping between Gould and Eddsworld and I don't think there is enough to justify articles on both of them so I would support a merge to Eddsworld (or vice versa). Shapeyness (talk) 15:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

H.A.M.M.E.R.

AfDs for this article:

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

Kept in AfD 10 years ago, so prod-ineligible - but at PROD level, sigh. Pure plot summary with a few mentions of comics etc. this organization appeared in, no analysis/reception. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline requirement nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. We can consider redirecting this per ATD-R to List of Marvel Comics teams and organizations _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to List of Marvel Comics teams and organizations#H. The Avengers and Philosophy as a secondary sources does have some commentary, at various places but especially p. 71-73, but mostly in relation to Norman Osborn and thus would just as well fit to Norman Osborn#H.A.M.M.E.R. and the Dark Avengers. Daranios (talk) 11:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect The coverage does not justify an article under the Wikipedia:General notability guideline requirement. Jontesta (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to its section at List of Marvel Comics teams and organizations in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE should no notability can be found before this discussion ends. --Rtkat3 (talk) 23:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Punch dimension

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

Non-notable fictional concept. The references included outside of primary sources only consist of trivial coverage, largely from content farms. Searches are not turning up any significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, making it a failure of the WP:GNG. I would have suggested redirecting it to Cyclops (Marvel Comics), except I don't think the name "Punch dimension" has ever actually been used in any official capacity in the comics, and is just a joke/meme name made up by fans. Rorshacma (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. Rorshacma (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cyclops (Marvel Comics) as natural parent topic: Aside from the CBR, ScreenRant and BleedingCool articles used in the article, this Collider article also covers the Punch Dimension and asserts that it is "described in 1983’s Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe", i.e. not a joke/meme name made up by fans. Daranios (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The concept of Cyclops' power being powered by another dimension is not the made up joke/meme, its the name "Punch Dimension" to describe it that is. The actual quote from the 1983 Official Handbook on the topic is quoted in this article - note that the name "Punch dimension" does not appear in it. Merging is not necessary because the full description of Cyclops' powers, including the concept of it being generated by portals to a dimension of kinetic energy is already described in Cyclops (Marvel Comics)#Powers and abilities. And Redirection would not be appropriate as the name "Punch Dimension" is not the official name of that dimension in the comics themselves, and is not named as such in the Cyclops article. Rorshacma (talk) 21:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, just to be sure I've understood correctly, said dimension is not named in 1983 Official Handbook anywhere outside the quoted passage? In that case we still have secondary sources like Collider, which I assume to be reliable, and ScreenRant, where consensus is "reliable for entertainment-related topics", which this is, which report on that fan-generated name. So we can and should briefly include this somewhere on Wikipedia based on those sources, and Cyclops still seems a fitting target for this bit of information to me. (And this, unexpectedly, makes it a non-plot, real-world related factum.) Daranios (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did I fly too close to the sun with this article? Perhaps. But was it worth it? Yes, yes it was. Er, I mean, I don't really object, because the name is a meme, but the dimension is real. Alliterator85 (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Can't find much WP:SIGCOV for a separate article. Might even be a WP:NEOLOGISM and WP:OR. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As everything is referenced and an additional source is listed above, WP:OR seems very unlikely. Daranios (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cyclops. No real SIGCOV, but it is a concept attached to Cyclops already described at his article that is a valid target for this. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hell (DC Comics)

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

Non-notable fictional location. News, Books, and Scholar turned up nothing about specifically DC's version of Hell, and the current article seems to be a nasty case of OR and SYNTH, since it combines many different interpretations of Hell from across DC canons into one article when they're unrelated to each other entirely, even in-universe. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Can't find reliable sources that treat hell as a concept that is distinct to these comics. Can't build an encyclopedic article without WP:SIGCOV. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There are no sources that I can find that would indicate the the specific depiction of Hell featured in DC Comics passes the WP:GNG. The references being used to create this article are a mess of primary and unreliable sources, and as pointed out by the nom, the content of the article appears to be heavily built upon WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. Rorshacma (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with its section at List of DC Universe locations in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 00:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above, preferable to hard deletion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of DC Universe locations#Hell in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. Sadly, this is lacking secondary sources, but those do exist, like the discussion in Hell and Its Afterlife, which seems to focus mostly on the Vertigo incarnation. A merge to a parent topic voids the question if there is a WP:SYNTH and notability problem or not by letting us discuss all versions such as they are next to each other. Daranios (talk) 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Butt-Head

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

Like Beavis, this article has no WP:SIGCOV at all per WP:BEFORE. Most of the sources talked about the film Beavis and Butt-Head, instead of the characters. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 10:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 10:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or merge per nom. Most sources really don't separate this character from the plot, let alone from the other main character. This doesn't have distinct WP:SIGCOV for its own article. This is a WP:NOPAGE situation where the essential details can be covered at the main Beavis and Butt-Head series article. Any additional plot information can be covered at the individual works. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Comics and animation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Shooterwalker. Series is notable but there's not really much discussing Butt-Head independently of the series, or even Beavis himself. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 15:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect for the reasons I laid out at the Beavis AfD. Note that the current hatnote on this page for butthead should be transferred if the redirect is created. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to be consistent with Beavis. Neither character has WP:SIGCOV, as the nomination stated. Jontesta (talk) 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorcerer Supreme

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable role that lists every non-notable character to fill said role in the comics, or every time a character briefly took on the mantle. This role isn't individually notable of any of the actual significant characters who held the role as a major part of their characters, such as Strange or the Ancient One. News searches turned up WP:ROUTINE coverage of the role's various changes in the comics, WP:VALNET sources that don't contribute to notability, or summary style articles that only recap plot info. Scholar and Books yield a few hits that look promising at a glance, but the sources that mention the role are predominantly discussing Doctor Strange, with the role only being brought up as a significant part of his character. This role is not independently notable of Strange or any other character, and is better off redirected to Strange's article, given the bulk of coverage predominantly discusses the mantle in the form of Strange's usage of it. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Doctor Strange. I did some digging per WP:BEFORE, but this is the only good source so far [1]. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 10:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Boneless Pizza!. There isn't really much distinct WP:SIGCOV to separate this from Doctor Strange. Other characters are mentioned, and this can be done at that article. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge with List of Marvel Comics characters: S in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE should no other coverage can be found. We have to put the information of those other Sorcerer Supremes somewhere on this website including the one from Earth-6160. --Rtkat3 (talk) 02:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you mean List of Marvel Comics characters: S? Either way, I'd oppose a merge. The Sorcerer Supreme is a role, not a character, and should not be put on a character list. The bulk of the characters on this list link somewhere else already; if they're mentioned anywhere as being Sorcerer Supreme, the explanation that exists at Strange's article should suffice to explain what the role is. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected the link. Help me out here, but are you suggesting that either you want the page to remain or have an honorable mentioning on Doctor Strange's page while having the other known Sorcerer Supremes transferred to the respectful List of Marvel Comics characters pages if the final outcome of this discussion ends with a merging? --Rtkat3 (talk) 14:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe a redirect to Strange more than suffices. We don't need to add references to a bulk of the characters on the list, since they either have their own articles already, or are so minor and obscure that they don't need to be mentioned. Strange's article more than suffices if an explanation of the Sorcerer Supreme role is needed. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. WP:FANCRUFT failing WP:GNG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Doctor Strange - He is the character that is most synonymous with the title, and the best sources I am finding that discuss the topic are doing so in the context of it being Strange's role. The actual definition of what the role of "Sorcerer Supreme" means is explained fully in the opening paragraphs of Strange's article already, so no merge is needed. Rorshacma (talk) 17:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 Phoenix Force. Daniel (talk) 15:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

White Hot Room

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

Most of the article is just WP:FANCRUFT. A WP:BEFORE search yield no WP:RS source talking about the character. WP:CBR and ScreenRant is not a source to determine reliability per WP:VALNET. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed what I believe was a bunch of the cruft. That link says that ScreenRant is "marginally reliable" so I believe those citations are fine, but I also added some more additional citations from non-CBR and non-ScreenRant sources. How does it read now? Alliterator85 (talk) 12:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/Merge to Phoenix Force per WP:NOPAGE - The Phoenix Force is the primary topic here, and I'm not seeing any sources that would justify having a separate article. It is already mentioned throughout the Phoenix Force article, but its not really explained well there, so a few sentences explaining what it is could probably stand to be merged to the "Fictional Character Biography" section to add some context. Rorshacma (talk) 08:06, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Rorschacma. The coverage indicates this is mostly a part of that topic. Not enough distinct WP:SIGCOV for its own article. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Rorschacma. Non-notable concept that has no notability independent of the Pheonix Force. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per above. Fancruft, fails GNG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:26, 9 January 2025 (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.

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 keep‎. No support for deletion. Owen× ☎ 14:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chinese animated series

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

I notice that Wikipedia's notability guidelines for lists are frustratingly vague. However, I would like to be bold in suggesting that this article is superfluous. We already have articles on general lists of animated series by year and a handful for animated series by country, and adding a third dimension of language seems unnecessary. Where does it end, is my question. The point of an encyclopedia is not to create exhaustive lists for every imaginable category. Having a common language is a rather trivial attribute that establishes no meaningful connection between these series. Anonymous 07:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Lists, and China. Anonymous 07:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:LISTCRIT and WP:LISTPURP. Clearly pass the informational criterion but the page sure does need cleaning up. This is the same case of pages like List of Philippine animated films. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this is a list by language, not national origin. No other such article exists, nor does creating more seem like a worthwhile endeavor. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Therefore, I would argue that this list does not serve an organizational purpose. Anonymous 16:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most sources I found, especially on Baidu, focus on national origin (search terms: 中文动画剧 and 中文动画列表). Same for the zhwiki article zh:中国动画列表. However, it seems to me that language is a far more useful and practical criterion for readers than a list by national origin, assuming readers are looking to watch series in a language they can understand. Important to this context, language is also more objective and less controversial. I don't particularly care if this stays or goes, but I'm pretty sure the bar of WP:NLIST is low enough that this list passes. Toadspike [Talk] 16:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If this is kept, I strongly support a move to List of Mandarin Chinese animated series or List of Standard Chinese animated series. Toadspike [Talk] 16:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would imagine an list of series that were produced in China and series that use the Chinese language would nearly be the same list, the issue about it being Mandarin series only could be fixed by adding series that use other dialogs. Jumpytoo Talk 03:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It meets criteria and I also disagree with the notion that the list is by language rather than national origin. The list plainly states that it is a list of animations from Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan only. Collectively, all of the listed locations are regarded legally as "China" in varying degrees where Taiwan is concerned. Singapore, which also has Mandarin as an official language, is excluded from the list. --Emm90 (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Emm90: It also explicitly states that they are all in Mandarin Chinese. Which is it? I've been swayed to believe that either would be a valid list, but surely it can't be both at once. Anonymous 23:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mandarin Chinese is the primary language of China, Cantonese is a common language in certain prefectures, like Hong Kong. It's no different imho than List of French television series saying It includes series made by France alone as well as those produced in collaboration with various other countries. Almost all are in the French language or List of Spanish television series saying The spoken language (in original presentation) is in Spanish unless otherwise noted. It's just worded worse, and needing the wording revised isn't a good enough reason to delete imo. Emm90 (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't exactly answer my question. As it stands, there is a sentence saying that all entries are in Mandarin Chinese (which I interpret as a poorly worded attempt at saying only Mandarin Chinese series should be added). To be clear, are you in favor of removing this sentence and all linguistic criteria, so long as the series are from China? Anonymous 03:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The list saying it's in Mandarin is no more egregious than the List of Spanish television series saying the spoken language is Spanish unless otherwise noted. It should perhaps be reworded to "the spoken language is Mandarian unless otherwise noted", because the majority of the content is probably going to be in Mandarin de facto. Emm90 (talk) 04:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It list things from 1980s, and the democracy of Taiwan was already an independent country from communist China for quite some time. China keeps lying to its people claiming Taiwan is part of China, so including them together is a political thing. So I removed mention of Taiwan. Anyway, the template at the bottom of the article shows other articles of this type for different nations. Anything on the list that doesn't have its own article or other proof of notability, should be removed. This is a valid navigational and information list. Dream Focus 04:14, 8 January 2025 (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.

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 redirect‎ to Josh Selig#Filmography. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Go, Baby!

AfDs for this article:

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

No indication of notability, even with the primary sources shown, simply listing IMDB and Disney deprives this article's notability TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As the most recent IP to contest the redirect created by the last nomination at least partially pointed out, all that has changed since that nomination is that the subject is no longer included in the list of programs broadcast by Disney Jr., and hasn't been since 2022. That, to me, indicates that retaining this in any capacity is no longer warranted (unless another redirect target surfaces). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, Disney, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Josh_Selig#Filmography: listed there; addresses the concern raised above. -Mushy Yank. 12:27, 4 January 2025 (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.

Lionel Luthor

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

I know this article is GA, but everything are cited as primary sources. Did WP:BEFORE, but found zero WP:SIGCOV. A source for ex like this [2] isn't. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 06:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 06:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Comics and animation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Man from Krypton, p. 85, has a relevant though brief characterization of Lionel Luthor, and likewise with The Smallville Chronicles. "Enter the Aleph: Superhero Worlds and Hypertime Realities" interestingly has a comparison to Samson of all people. Most importantly, does anyone have access to "The Role of Parents in the Processing of Adolescent Trauma in Smallville"? That sounds pretty promising. Daranios (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Found it, here. This paper does have a lot of plot summary on Lionel Luthor, but also evaluation of his role, although mostly in relation to Lex Luthor (Smallville). Daranios (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to Lex Luthor (Smallville) or/and List of Smallville characters#Lionel Luthor. While the great majority of material here is referenced to primary sources, it is not everything. There's IGN, DVD Verdict (where I don't know if it's reliable) and the Saturn Award. More importantly, the secondary sources listed above (result of a non-exhaustive WP:BEFORE search) together can provide enough commentary to fullfill WP:WHYN and WP:NOTPLOT. Much of the commentary is related to the relationship with Lex Luthor, so I have no objection against a merge. Daranios (talk) 21:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Lex Luthor (Smallville) or/and List of Smallville characters#Lionel Luthor. I would default to the list, with any additional detail covered at Lex Luthor. I agree that most of the coverage is in relation to Lex Luthor. There isn't enough WP:SIGCOV for a meaningful article but there is still something to WP:PRESERVE. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the claims that were made by @Daranios:. --Rtkat3 (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I trust Daranios judgement here. But take away the GA status: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Lionel Luthor/1. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Piotrus. GNG met. Jclemens (talk) 04:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion