Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superman Chronicles

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 to delete. Black Kite 23:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Superman Chronicles

Superman Chronicles (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Series of trade paperbacks with no claim in article of meeting WP:Notability. Has not made the NY Times bestseller list; gsearch not coming up with notability. Contested prod. Fabrictramp (talk) 21:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 21:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete pn also the article seems a bit like it is advertising the comics described. Captain panda 03:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
• Seem to be a fair number of reviews.

• http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SNSB&p_theme=snsb&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=11040B2DF197FBE0&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
• http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-143180516.html
• http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/116181173013207.htm
• http://www.bookmunch.co.uk/view.php?id=1692
• http://www.earthsmightiest.com/comics/review-the-superman-chronicles-volume-4/

thus Keep Hobit (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• keep per Hobit. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Rather pointless article. Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep based on the numerous sources found by Hobit. Edward321 (talk) 04:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
• Merge to the relevant entry - this is already covered here: Action Comics#Collected editions which seems to be the appropriate place for this information to go (and most series have a section for the collected volumes). If there are reviews then add them in there. This seems unnecessary duplication of effort. (Emperor (talk) 20:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC))

• Comment Not a comics guy, but unless I'm mistaken not all of those in this series will be from Action Comics, correct? Hobit (talk) 21:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not 100% sure of the plans but that would seem a reasonable assumption - in which case the information can be added to the relevant entry - which is where the information should be. There is an argument on precedent as there are Showcase Presents and Marvel Omnibus - although these seem a little thin. If it could be made into something more like DC Archive Editions, Marvel Masterworks and Essential Marvel then I'd be fine with keeping it. The reviews would also help expand the real world context. As it stands it is very thin and just really replicates information elsewhere, hence my suggesting a merge might be the best option (for now - no prejudice on someone working on it in their sandbox and restarting with an improved version if more information is available - history along with some comments from the DC editors/creators about it would be a big boost). (Emperor (talk) 14:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC))

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. —Emperor (talk) 20:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Per others. No valid deletion reason given. Being a trade paperback isn't a deletion reason, neither is not having made the NT Times bestseller list. Hobit was able to produce several reliable sources that would indicate notability. Rray (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

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.