Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garganta

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 Femforce#Other characters. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 15:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Garganta[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)

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar." It was deprodded by User:Andrew Davidson with no meaningful rationale, so here we go as usual. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notice how the PROD and nomination are exactly the same as for Zeiss with no details, evidence or particulars of the topic that we are supposed to be discussing. This character is interesting as an example of the giant woman type and so has been noticed in that context – see The Modern Amazons. The character is part of the Femforce cast of characters and so naturally attracts notice in that context too – see The Superhero Book –The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Comic-Book Icons . Per policy WP:ATD, the worst case would be merger into some more general page such as that and so deletion is not appropriate. "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page.". Andrew🐉(talk) 11:04, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect - It's amazing to see someone so blatantly hypocritically try to downplay the nomination due to lack of care when his work on dePRODing articles is way more abysmal. The Superhero Book literally mentions the character twice with zero context, so that shows he didn't even look at the source before posting it. That aside, this fails to establish notability to satisfy WP:GNG. TTN (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Femforce as an WP:ATD. Does not appear independently notable in the slightest, nor does the trolling by Andrew D. establish notability._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Femforce#Other characters, not enough in-depth coverage to warrant own article. Mentioned in target.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:30, 29 November 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.