Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superhero and supervillain hideouts and bases

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 of the debate was keep and cleanup. Mailer Diablo 12:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Superhero and supervillain hideouts and bases[edit]

Looks like classic listcruft with no rhyme or reason; includes examples from classic comic books, a children's animated series, and even Lord of the Rings. Thatcher131 00:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The talk page has the results of a Vfd from August, 2004. Roughly 9 delete to 5 keep (in one way or another). Thatcher131 00:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet. The earliest version [1] is hilarious, like Borges, or Joseph Cornell. · rodii · 02:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the title seems inherently POV, with no clear guideline for inclusion. Kevin 00:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- LOL, what the hell? How is the title POV? +Hexagon1 ^(t) 12:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Edit conflict delete yeh. --Osbus 00:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Weakish) Keep. I don't think this article suffers from any inherent POV problems any more than any other article about a fictional location or locations. (I mean, what? If a character is a superhero or supervillain, and has a secret hideout, that strikes me as extremely straightforward -- not a lot of room for POV there, at least not when compared to many other topics...) I'm not really sure how relevant or useful a list like this is, but secret hideouts, bases and headquarters are a long-standing staple of the genre, and many of them are fairly famous. I'm not really a big fan of "list of..." articles in general, but if List of teenage stoner movies is considered to be relevant, I don't see why this wouldn't be. (Not that I subscribe to the "well, we already have <crap A>, so we might have <crap B> as well" idea, either, but you get my point.) Obviously, the article is going to be in need of work and organization, but that's a separate issue. -- Captain Disdain 00:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I ABSOLUTELY think List of teenage stoner movies should be AfD'd. It's a really terrible article, and it could never be anything but a really terrible article. -- Kicking222 01:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Well, it's POV because... really, who are we to decide that someone is a supervillain? Maybe to someone, a teenage stoner maybe, he's a superhero. And don't get me started on the negative connotations of "hideout." This should be called "Differently powered individuals' workplaces." PS: Delete. · rodii · 02:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Heh! What with the weak keep and all, I don't really disagree all that much with deleting the article, but I'm not quite sure that your analysis of the POV aspects of the article is entirely valid. =) -- Captain Disdain 02:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Not to mention that Batman and Syndrome (possibly among others) are not so much "differently powered" as they are "differently motivated." Thatcher131 13:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete listcruft as per nom Bwithh 02:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Though I agree with Wikipedia:Listcruft generally, it's only an essay, and this is a fun list to have. We have at least as much trivia on here about Star Trek and Star Wars. Also, POV is not a reason for deletion. --Chaser (T) 05:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fun, verifiable, and most of the hideouts on the list are notable enough for us to have articles on them. (But not all, so this list is not made redundant by Category:Fictional secret bases.) David Sneek 08:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a good source for improving this article. I'll note on its talk page. --Chaser (T) 08:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per David Sneek, although agree it needs improvement. Seb Patrick 10:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If the consensus is swinging around to keep, or at least no consensus, the article needs categorization and better inbound linking (I found it on the orphan article list). Also note that the Vfd was closed no consensus with the expectation that someone would improve it but no one really did. Thatcher131 11:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand, not listcruft and content is verifiable. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Needs expansion, but could become useful digital_m e^(t/c) 15:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Nick C 16:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep improve and expand. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 17:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – as pointless list, unless someone here is willing to try and make a proper article of it (article, not list) – Gurch 22:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'm already updating (in response to it being listed here) and will try to work up an intro paragraph or two soon. CovenantD 23:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Clean-up, this could be a useful article if it became more than just a list. Sorry Guy 07:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete listcruft per nom M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 22:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Heavy cleanup needed though. Havok (T/C/c) 08:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but needs clean-up. - CNichols 20:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean-up, probably limit to just superhero comics (no Suaron). -- Dragonfiend 03:56, 31 May 2006 (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.