Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kinetic (comics)

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. Cabayi (talk) 10:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Kinetic (comics)[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)

entirely in universe, written by (declared) page editor. DGG ( talk ) 19:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While the poor writing is certainly a problem, I'm not seeing a criteria for deletion cited here. Did the article fail a source check (WP:Notability)? Is the implication that the subject of the article is a fan theory or hoax? Dark knight 2149 02:08, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Failure of GNG. Fancruft article that seems to have not been written with any kind of Wikipedia policy in mind or intent to add reliable sources._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 09:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:FANCRUFT that fails WP:NFICTION _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:27, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Until solid ground for deletion is established, in which case I am willing to retract this vote. "It's just fancruft", "It's just not notable", It's poorly written", and "No one is working on it" aren't strong points. Dark knight 2149 07:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Topic lacks coverage in reliable sources needed to meet WP:GNG. The current sources are all primary, so it fails WP:NOTPLOT. TTN (talk) 17:10, 18 October 2020 (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.