Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viv Vision

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 List of Marvel Comics characters: V#Viv Vision. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 20:24, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Viv Vision[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable fictional character is covered within List_of_Marvel_Comics_characters:_V#Viv_Vision and should be redirected there rather than having a separate article. A series of redirects/reverts have taken place so I bring it here for discussion. Gab4gab (talk) 14:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Completely non-notable and the editor who made it clearly had no intention of actually working on it to make it even a remotely passable article even after I contacted their talk-page and explained to them. More of a "leave it to others to make something of it style".★Trekker (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep if article is improved. Character is now a member of the Champions (2016 team).User:tomburbine (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List_of_Marvel_Comics_characters:_V#Viv_Vision for now. She is still a relatively new character, and there aren't a whole lot of non-plot sources discussing her right now. As mentioned, she is appearing in more books, and could potentially become a more prominent character with reliable sources discussing her in a non-plot way, and if that occurs this can easily be restored as a separate article. But, until then, a redirect to the main character list is the best choice. 64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

She is also a character in the Marvel Tsum Tsum game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdyUIZ69MBA All the other characters in the game appear to me to be considered notable characters. https://www.tsumtsumcentral.com/MarvelGameCharacterList.aspx User:tomburbine (talk) 18:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the list article. The entry there can be formatted to accommodate the game appearance mentioned above. The criteria for characters to be independently notable is fluid and vague, but my standard go-to is "has this character had a self-titled series?" Viv hasn't had one yet. I do not oppose splitting the article back out if/when there is suitable coverage. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the list per above comments. Returning to my redirect vote as I am still not convinced that this has enough notability to warrant its own page at this present moment. Aoba47 (talk) 16:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Viv Vision has also appeared in Monsters Unleashed (comics) and is treated exactly the same as all other notable characters in the series. User:tomburbine (talk) 16:55, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

appearing in a notable comic with other notable characters does not confer notability to Viv. Please read WP:GNG. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Viv Vision has also appeared on the variant cover of All New Wolverine #13. Non-notable characters are usually not featured on variant covers for other character's comics. https://www.amazon.com/Wolverine-Arthur-Vision-Champions-Variant/dp/B01MCT8CDQ User:tomburbine (talk) 13:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Viv is also part of Marvel press releases. https://geek-finity.com/2016/08/22/marvel-teases-that-viv-vision-will-change-the-world-in-octobers-champions/ User:tomburbine (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And covered in outside news sources. http://www.cbr.com/in-champions-viv-visions-wi-fi-password-will-break-your-heart/ https://primaryignition.com/tag/viv-vision/ http://ew.com/article/2016/07/05/marvel-champions/ User:tomburbine (talk) 15:10, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion on notability is focused on the character's notability outside of the context of the series/source material so it is irrelevant to this discussion if the character " has also appeared in Monsters Unleashed (comics) and is treated exactly the same as all other notable characters in the series" as already stated by Argento Surfer. The character's appearance on the variant cover does not lead to notability alone; it would only be useful if the character's appearance on the cover received significant coverage in third-party, notable sources (i.e. more than an appearance on a list or a brief sentence). The press release is a nice resource to have for an article, but it also does not establish notability as it is closely connected to the publisher. It also does not contain that much information on the character aside from a brief description of her identity and that she will be featured in a series. The CBR source is a really good and there is a lot that you can pull out about the character from that. The Primary Ignition source could also be helpful for getting a better grip on the character's reception. The EW source is also good, but the reference to Viv is rather brief. Tl;dr: The cover and the character's appearances in the series does not prove notability, while the three websites listed are a good start. I am still not 100% convinced about this character's notability and would suggest that you keep digging for further resources. Aoba47 (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reviews of Champions all discuss her exploits. http://www.cbr.com/in-champions-viv-visions-wi-fi-password-will-break-your-heart/ http://primaryignition.com/2016/11/07/a-champions-2-review-superhero-camping-trip/ http://bamsmackpow.com/2017/01/10/champions-4-review-sea-faring-adventure-no-pirates/ http://bamsmackpow.com/2017/02/02/champions-5-review-balancing-substance-gwenpool/ http://www.newsarama.com/32609-best-shots-reviews-champions-4-captain-america-sam-wilson-17.html User:tomburbine (talk) 21:53, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While looking through those sources, I found a somewhat uneven coverage of the character. Some of the articles provide some commentary on the character, while I know that one of them only briefly mentions the character in terms of summary. Again, I think you have done a wonderful job in uncovering more sources on this character and I am definitely getting a better understanding of your argument, but I am just going to wait to either confirm my existing vote or revise it until I hear feedback from other more experienced users. Just pinging the following people to ask their opinion on the latest developments: (@Argento Surfer:@Gab4gab:@*Treker:). Aoba47 (talk) 23:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stirking my vote for now given the inclusion of additional sources; I will look through this again in the future to revise my stance if this is still open. Aoba47 (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments As Argento Surfer mentioned there is little guidance regarding articles for fictional characters. Previous Afd discussions don't show a lot of consistency in the criteria applied. We do have something in WP:BKMERGE which says (among other things) "...it is not normally advisable to have a separate article on a character or thing from the book,..." Which is contrary to the idea that any major character is 'Wikipedia notable', although it goes on to say there are exceptions. Typically we look for significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Source content that is written by or an interview response from a connected individual does not contribute to notability. This is the case with some of the sources in the article and mentioned here. Coverage in press releases is not independent and thus not helpful to notability. Looking at the current sources in the article:
- The King Builds a Better Family in “Vision" article is an interview of Tom King. Not independent coverage.
- The Marvel's 'Champions': Young superheroes channel activist sides in new series article is another interview of connected individuals. Not independent coverage.
- The Marvel teases that Viv Vision will change the world in October’s “Champions” article has trivial mentions of Viv. It's just a couple sentences and a press release list of Champions #1 facts.
- The Hydra strikes in first preview of Marvel's Secret Empire #1 article has just her name in a list of characters.
- The They Are Champions At Kissing… ( Squee SPOILERS) is a brief article with, imo, one trivial fact.
- The In Champions, Viv Vision’s Wi-Fi Password Will Break Your Heart article does have several mentions of Viv as it runs through the story line.
- The Champions #4 Review: A Sea Faring Adventure With No Pirates article mentions Viv a few times as the story line is summarized. There are four sentences discussing the Viv character separate from the story line content.
- The Viv Vision Skills Intro | MARVEL Tsum Tsum video is not independent, thus not helpful to notability.

That's not much independent coverage of Viv. Character mentions in a plot summary are routine and not an indication of exceptional notability. The Primary Ignition material makes some mentions of Viv but again it's mostly plot summary with nothing in-depth about Viv. I'll look over the other sources mentioned here and update if I've missed something helpful to notability. Gab4gab (talk) 16:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with everybody's comments. She is a relatively new character who has never had her own solo series. But she is a member of a relatively new superteam that is published monthly by a major publisher and is getting notability as a member of that superteam. This notability is not translating into lots of news articles just on her but she is getting more prominently displayed on comic covers, other comic series, and video games. User:tomburbine (talk) 01:34, 11 April 2017 (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.