Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional newspapers

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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional newspapers[edit]

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

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

This list is very much like the now deleted List of fictional comics and List of fictional magazines. It has more than hundred entries, yet only about a half dozen of the listed newspapers have their own articles. The list also cites no sources at all, and has no criterion for inclusion. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Not a very active user (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Indiscriminate non-notable list. Just because a newspaper is used as a prop in a movie does not mean we need to record its name that wouldn't even be mentioned in a detailed plot summary of that work. The Daily Planet and Daily Prophet yes, the other 95% of this list absolutely not. Reywas92^Talk 19:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Textbook case of a WP:INDISCRIMINATE list. Delete per nom._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 21:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhhh disappointing. I have a love-hate with our multitude of "list of fictional ___" entries. I love that someone put this together, but yeah, it's hard to see how it passes our guidelines for lists. I even found a handful of sources listing some fictional newspapers... but what makes this list great is also its downfall: the main appeal is its vast length. I just imagine someone taking notes while watching any media and adding new ones to the list as they appear. I hope that whoever created this will copy it and put it somewhere else. I don't know where, though... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:33, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - List of potentially infinite minutia. The category handles the small number of entries just fine. TTN (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Very, very few of these are actually notable, and there are no sources that discuss the grouping as a whole that would allow it to pass WP:LISTN. This is pretty much the definition of an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of minor trivial. Rorshacma (talk) 18:46, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Indiscriminate, sprawling list of badly sourced fancruft. I agree with Rhododendrites that a lot of work has gone into this, and I hope it finds a new home at Wikia or somewhere similar, but this encyclopedia is not the place for it. Reyk _YO! 09:23, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a few of these are almost certainly notable (like the Daily Planet), but some of these are one time mentions, and in some cases we just learn they are someone's employer, not anything else. The Daily Planet almost certainly becomes notable because it is the employer of Lois Lane and Clark Kent across almost all the media they appear in. Especially in the films and TV shows it becomes a medium of communicating information, the setting of much of the action, and lots of other things. Possibly no where is this more true than in Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman. A few episodes occur almost completely in the news room of the Daily Planet. That does not translate into every newspaperever mentioned in a work of fiction being notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:15, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It gets more clear that the Daily Planet is a measure of notability. True, it does not appear by that name in Superman until 1940. However we have this line "The Daily Planet has been featured in all adaptations of Superman to other media." We also learn that Iris West Allen (wife of the Flash) and Bruce Wayne (the Batman) have had connections with the Daily Planet. In some incarnations of Superboy Perry White won a pulitzer prize for his story on Superboy for the Planet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:27, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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