Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uncanny X-men 094
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Arguments were not strong for either side. Concern about setting a precedent not a strong argument, WP:NOT PAPER is not a strong rebuttal. References have been added so that negates some of the Delete comments. I'd have to say that appears the Keep commentors have more knowledge of the field than the Delete commentors have, although with the numbers and lack of strong arguments its not a straight Keep either. Herostratus 06:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Uncanny X-Men 94
Articles on individual issues, unless they are particularly notable for some specific reason, are the wrong way to go about documenting comics history. We have articles on prominent story arcs, like Days of Future Past and the Dark Phoenix Saga; we don't need an article on each of the 485 issues of Uncanny X-Men. This article also sets a bad precedent. Also, this article has no sources and consists primarily of a plot summary and list of characters, which violates WP:NOT. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 06:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete There are almost 500 issues of this comic, and since issues are just part of story arcs I see no reason for any individual issue to have an article (even articles on the story arcs might be too much unless they are major events, like the ones stated by the nominator). TJ Spyke 09:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete We can't list each and every "notable issue" of Uncanny X-Men or any other comic book; this article violates WP:NOT --Mhking 22:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions. -- -- Ben 03:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete. I'm strongly against the worries about setting a bad precedent; the fear that this needs to be nipped in the bud now because we dont want an article on all 500 odd issues is a straw man. There are only two articles on the individual issues, and there are articles for most episodes of many TV shows. So, it is possible. But it needs to be done well. The lack of sources in this case is unsatisfactory. John Vandenberg 10:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NOT#PAPER. Crazy notable issue. We could probably add 10-20 refs to this if we want to. - Peregrine Fisher 05:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I added 10 refs. We could probably find 10 more if we try. I understand the concerns about articles on all 500 issues, but this is a special issue. Although Giant-Size X-Men #1 is the first appearance of some of the new X-Men, this issue is where the old team is replaced by the new team. This is the first standard appearance of the most famous superhero team ever. It is also the most notable issue of X-Men after #1, and I think we can make room for a well cited article on it. The arguments for deletion so far are that it's non-notable, that it will set a bad precedent, and that we can't have articles on every notable issue. Well, notability has been established. We do have lots of articles in areas that include notable and non-notable subjects, so I don't think creating an article on something notable sets any bad precedents. Finally, obviously we can create articles for all notable issues. This nomination was created because the editor thought it wasn't a notable issue, but it is. If we delete this, we'll be deleting what is now one our best cited comics related articles. That would be the bad precedent. - Peregrine Fisher 04:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NOT#PAPER. Nominator also gives no deletion rationale, except "I don't like it". Matthew 08:31, 25 April 2007 (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.
