Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mac Gargan

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. Given this is the consensus of the participants and recent improvements to this article, I'm closing this discussion as Keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mac Gargan

[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)

Lenghy piece about a minor comic book villain, with zero evidence of notability - it's just a plot summary, publication history and list of appearances in other media, with zero reception section. My BEFORE fails to find anything other than plot summaries. See also related (still ongoing AfD) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scorpion (Marvel Comics)‎ . I suggest redirecting this to List of Spider-Man enemies. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:20, 11 October 2022 (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} 04:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.★Trekker (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, but most if not all of these fail WP:SIGCOV. It's just a list of sources that mention this character, many in passing, and most of the discussion is limited to plot summaries; the best sources are simply a coverage of social medial complaint by the actor who portrayed the character in one movie that he wasn't given a chance to appear in a sequel. This is as niche as itr gets. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:16, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Claiming this subject is as "niche as it gets" is utterly ridiculous.★Trekker (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the existence of significant coverage. Also, this character isn't even minor. Dark knight 2149 04:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I would, however, support merging Scorpion (Carmilla Black) into this page. That page should have been nominated instead. Dark knight 2149 04:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Why don't you consider putting that in List of Marvel Comics characters: S instead? --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above arguments, and noting recent improvements to the sourcing on the article. BOZ (talk) 07:19, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would say this is the most significant Marvel/DC character nominated for deletion in recent years. Anyone interested in Spiderman or Marvel villains is going to want to know information on this character so deleting this does not benefit the reader. I'm mostly fine with the sources presented above; I recognize my standards for GNG may be lower than the rest of the community and that is fine. There was a Scorpion (Marvel Comics) article this this and all other similar characters could have potentially been merged with but it was essentially deleted after being brought to AFD. Then there is a redirect/merge to a List of Marvel comics characters but to me a character of this significance should not be on that list. So I'm left with Keep. There are certainly minor comics characters whose articles can be deleted or redirect, but this is not one of them. Rhino131 (talk) 13:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the claims of @StarTrekker:, @BOZ:, and @Rhino131: --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I created a "Reception" section and tried to add more sources few days ago. I am convinced this page succeeds to be notable. In my opinion, if this page gets deleted, many pages should be deleted as well, which would not make sense because a page with a few secondary and several primary sources can still manage to be notable. I do not believe hundreds of secondary sources are necessary to create/keep a page on Wikipedia. But in the case of the article named Mac Gargan, I sincerely think there are enough sources. Higher Further Faster (talk) 10:56, 15 October 2022 (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.