Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superman/Shazam: First Thunder

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 Keep, considered closing as a no consensus but considering the sources identified at the end of the debate feel these sources go a long way towards satisfying the concerns of many of the delete opinions especially as a no consensus would default to keep anyway. However please add these sources to the article which does have an overlong plot summary compared to the rest of the article. Davewild (talk) 19:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Superman/Shazam: First Thunder

Superman/Shazam: First Thunder (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

No content except for a long summary of the plot of this four-issue comic book miniseries. Don't really believe this is notable to stand on its own as an article. FuriousFreddy (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. No real-world notability established and WP:NOT#OR. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot summaries aren't OR unless they draw conclusions or make speculations about the primary source. However, Wikipedia is not meant to be a substitute for the source material, so the article should definitely be condensed. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 02:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Notable artist: Joshua Middleton and writer: Judd Winick. Notable enough for a paperback reprint. Some review attention: Here and here and here, among others. Not a major event in the history of comics publishing, but notable enough in my opinion. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

What notablility does this have in the real world other than "it existed?" Virtually every comic that comes out is reviewed; that doesn't mean they all deserve Wikipedia articles. Being produced by a "notable" artist and writer doesn't inherently make the comic notable. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 23:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete due to failure to meet WP:NOTE. —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 17:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Agreed with TreasuryTag that this article fails to meet WP:NOTE. Cubzrule (talk)
• Keep or Merge with Captain Marvel (DC Comics). This is a mini-series featuring very notable characters published by a major comic book company. It has secondary sources as listed above. Granted, they're not the most prestigious reviewers, but it could be considered significant coverage. The plot summary aspect of the article is rather horrific, but that should be addressed by editing, not by deletion. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 02:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Is every Superman comic book inherently notable because Superman is in it? And what content here would be merged to the Captain Marvel article? Redirect, fine, but merging? --FuriousFreddy (talk) 04:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Amend that to "comic book series" and I would say yes, actually. I also feel that all comic book series published by the two major American publishers, Marvel and DC, are also notable. I feel that this is akin to the notability of all television series produced by the three major American networks. I recognize that not everyone agrees with this. However, there is no specific notability guideline for WikiProject Comics, so the consensus is hashed out on a case-by-case basis.

As far as merging content, this series outlined the "origin" of how these two characters first met in the fictional DC universe, so I think this could reasonably be mentioned in the Captain Marvel article. It might be of interest as the character belonged to another shared universe prior to its acquisition by DC. On the other hand, I'd be loathe to put it in the Superman article as that article has already had to be split several times. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 05:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

It's already mentioned in the Captain Marvel article. And while the comics project may not have specific guidelines for notability, Wikipedia in general does have specific guidelines for dealing with fictitious works. And not every comic (series) is inherently notable because it exists and was published by Marvel or DC. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 13:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - multiple reviews of the storyline, in addition to the quick list above, satisfies notabilty. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC).

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete As it stands, the article has way too much information on the plot, and almost nothing on non-fictional information. I may be willing to change to keep if more sources can be added to the article and more encyclopedic information can be added. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 14:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, a miniseries with Superman and Captain Marvel is notable in my opinion. --Pixelface (talk) 14:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Uh-huh, you do realize we base these decision on guideline/policies and not your person opinion? TJ Spyke 14:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Nothing to indicate what makes this miniseries notable. TJ Spyke 14:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Merge or Delete Well, this really sould be merged with Superman and captain marvel, as it appears to be notable enough to be on here; but I don't think it should have it's own article. Kimu 18:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep it's noteable enough. Series of this sort are usually notable. a keep or delete shouldn't depend on the present state ofthe article, if more or less content of some sort is needed, the solution is editing. DGG (talk) 23:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, it should be judged by its sources, which are wanting. Blast Ulna (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep here's another RS. [1] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) And a subscription only ref. [2] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 16:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I think we can drum up more information on this. I did some quick nosing around and found: Interviews with artist [3] [4]. At Comic Book Resources: "This will probably go down as the best modern characterization of Billy Batson" [5], sales: #2 (28) [6], #3 (28) [7] and #4 (50) - trade (#19) [8]. I'm sure we can dig up more information and flesh it out with thoughts from the creators and a reception section for reviews, sales, etc. (Emperor (talk) 03:05, 15 March 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.