Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Spectre

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Black Spectre[edit]

Black Spectre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This does not establish notability independent of Marvel Comics through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a difference from being mentioned in something and being covered in something. Unless those provide real world information, there is nothing that can be added to the article, and it cannot be considered significant coverage. TTN (talk) 15:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know. You should have read my edits (the sources and the external link) before writing your comment. The sources from Comic Book Resources contains the WP:WAF#Secondary information and the external link to The Comic Book Database demonstrates that future improvement of the article is possible because the last appearances of the Black Spectre organization had not been taken into account. --Crazy runner (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of the time of my comment, all you had done was source primary information. As of now, it looks more like you're writing a section for Moon Knight than for this character. It could be merged over with only a couple tweaks to the first couple sentences, so I think there is a weight issue with that. The source for the organization is just a teaser for that series of comics, so I'm not seeing much potential there. If this is kept, the organization should probably be removed and moved over to Features of the Marvel Universe. TTN (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time of your comment, you could have look at the sources and see if there is an interest. Now I have the impression that you are not even looking the sources before merging articles, proposing deletions or commenting one. About the analysis section, it is your opinion but with this kind of thoughts, I think that only superheroes will have analysis section. And I do not see the interest to split the article, there is no confusion possible. Many articles on Marvel Comics present different meanings for the same name. If you have pages with characters of the same name, have you got also the intention to suppress the minor characters ? If it is the case, you should ask contributors' opinions on the different projects. I will follow Wikipedia:Splitting, the article is neither too big nor too small. No confusion possible between the two meanings of Black Spectre in Marvel Comics. The sections have nearly the same size. In my opinion, the supporting material is present. --Crazy runner (talk) 17:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you had said something like "adding sources, will expand later", it might have been worth taking a look, but just tacking them onto to primary material made it seem unlikely that they were of any note. The main thing about that section is that 70% of it is talking about the impact on Moon Knight, the development of that character, and overall reception to that issue. It's fine material, but too weighted towards that. If "the character is depicted as the antithesis of Moon Knight" can be expanded into a paragraph, and the death of the character more weighted towards the actual character, it would be a fine indicator of notability. Assuming that the character does establish notability, keeping the unrelated organization is sort of weird from an organizational standpoint. Keeping content that would otherwise be removed just because a topic of the same name is notable doesn't make much sense. TTN (talk) 18:07, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sometimes in dictionnaries and encyclopedias, you could find very different definitions under the same name. Sorry, to read that some wikipedia pages do not make much sense for you. This article covers the meanings of Black Spectre inside the Mavel Comics. --Crazy runner (talk) 19:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge - This particular subject will never have enough meat to be a GA or FA, but it's more than just a stub, and does feature some non-fictional content. I think it's quality enough to remain by itself, but if at the very worst it should be merged to List of Marvel Comics Charaters: B, not outright deleted. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:50, 7 December 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Black_Spectre&oldid=1070436917"