Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Comics and animation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Comics and animation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Comics and animation. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...

Scan for comics AfDs

Scan for animation AfDs
Scan for webcomics AfDs
Scan for comics Prods
Scan for animation Prods
Scan for webcomics Prods
Scan for comics template TfDs
Scan for animated series template TfDs

Related deletion sorting

Comics and animation

Snowflame

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

An incredibly obscure comics villain. He's had a bit of a spur of re-appearances recently, and his subject matter seems like it would be discussed a lot, but there really isn't much on him. Google News hits turn up only Valnet and unreliable sources, Scholar yields no hits except for one book source, and Google Books search yields only the same book source: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Legion_of_Regrettable_Supervillains/TUhmCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq="Snowflame" -wikipedia&pg=PA245&printsec=frontcover

This book source is additionally entirely plot summary. There's no analysis, Reception, or really anything I can find that actually establishes the subject's notability. I'd be happy to withdraw this nom if anyone happens to stumble on anything I've missed, but this is just a genuinely obscure character with basically nothing to his name, and it at best a case of TOOSOON depending on how much Snowflame gets used going forward. This article is likely better off being redirected or merged into another article. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (as page creator). I think that sites such as Vice, Gizmodo, HuffPost, and IGN (which are all cited in the article) provide enough coverage for the subject to pass WP:GNG. Di (they-them) (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch on those. Being entirely honest, I missed them when I was going through the article, so I'm really sorry about missing those. Still, IGN doesn't seem to contribute to notability per being routine coverage of an ongoing television series, with Snowflame only mentioned as appearing in the series, and the Comicbook sources are primarily plot summary. The VICE, Gizmodo, and HuffPost pieces are all decent enough, but my problem is that there really isn't anything here worth splitting. All of them say the same thing: Snowflame was mildly offensive, and later got a webcomic series. Given the character's incredibly small amount of appearances, Snowflame can quite easily exist in the character list without even threatening undue weight, with only a sentence or two really needed to describe why the character was notable. The issue here isn't really notability, but moreso the fact that Snowflame doesn't really have enough content to really warrant a split off the wider character list. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The VALNET articles are the first several references; the non-VALNET ones are like the entire right-handed column, so if you just looked at the first few, VALNET is what you would see. I get what you're saying about this not being a big deal to merge to a character list, and I agree: it would be a fine article to editorially merge. This, however, is a process that would compel such a merge, and in my mind the standard of non-notability is not met such that the article should be force-merged. Propose it on the talk page and I wouldn't have noticed or cared. Jclemens (talk) 03:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep VALNET sources aren't needed to demonstratae notability. HuffPo, Gizmodo, and IGN are just fine per RSP, so the VALNET sources aren't necessary to meet GNG. Comicbook.com is also not VALNET, doesn't have an RSP entry, and seems to have been used for similar articles without issue. While the nod to BEFORE is appreciated, reviewing the sources already referenced at time of nomination is important, too. Jclemens (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources like Vice, Gizmodo, HuffPost, and IGN covered Snowflame, which shows the character meets WP:GNG. I agree that the character is obscure. Yet, there is enough content to warrant a standalone article, even if it remains short.--AstridMitch (talk) 23:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: see concerns at ANI that the AFD !votes by AstridMitch, now blocked, are LLM-aided. Abecedare (talk) 20:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chickenpox (South Park)

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

Only two sources, which do not appear to qualify as SIGCOV. There does not seem to be a justification based on notability as on why this episode should have a separate article (i.e. it could also be redirected to South Park (season 2). Stanley Joseph Wilkins (talk) 05:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, United States of America, and Colorado. Stanley Joseph Wilkins (talk) 05:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to South Park season 2 - The A.V. Club is SIGCOV but it alone isn't enough. I found some list entries by MovieWeb ([1]) and Digital Spy ([2]) but I don't consider those SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. --Mika1h (talk) 09:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep AV Club is sigcov, and I feel making the list at movieweb for underrated episodes (coming 20 years after it originally aired) is cause enough for passing WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 18:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Two sources -- as they say, OH! That's A SIGCOV!! jp×g 🗯️ 23:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabby's Dollhouse: The Movie

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

Lacking significant coverage per WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 20:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Film, and Comics and animation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Filming has started and coverage existing online seems significant enough. Redirect or Draft if other users don't think it is. Very opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Super Hero Squad toys

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

Only has one source and seems to violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Toys, and Lists. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Ajf773 (talk) 10:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Malinaccier (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red Storm (webtoon)

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

Fails significant coverage. The little commentary I found is in this CBR listicle, others are just plot summary and mention in other listicles. Neocorelight (Talk) 02:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Webcomics. Neocorelight (Talk) 02:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: could there be Korean sources we're missing? Not to say it might not be non-notable. Mrfoogles (talk) 08:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows? Maybe you can find them? I can't read Korean. Neocorelight (Talk) 09:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:GNG, before you nominate articles for deletion, you really should search in the native language of the topic. As you're the one making the proposal, I'd argue the burden of proof is on you to follow through with it. With machine translation it's really not that hard, as you only need a high-level understanding of what each source says. Almost every day I see deletion nominations like these.

That said, I'm leaning delete. I'm a Korean speaker and didn't find much convincing sigcov. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 07:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete – I am not an expert at Korean sources and cannot quite tell you which of these sources are reliable right now, but this is what I'm finding:

gameca.com, three paragraphs as part of a list.
techm.kr, three paragraphs as part of a list.
news.nate.com, listed entry, basically nothing.
news.nate.com, listed entry, basically nothing.
mk.co.kr, listed entry, basically nothing.
yna.co.kr, listed entry, basically nothing.
chosun.com, author quote, basically nothing.
sisaprime.co.kr, listed entry that is given ridiculously high praise (Google Translate gives me Kakao Webtoon, which has created major action/martial arts/fantasy masterpieces that will leave a lasting mark in webtoon history, such as .. Red Storm. Segye.com might be a copy, extremely similar text)

I currently have no idea which of these are reliable, but sourcing is fairly weak either way. If someone can find better sources I haven't found yet, I'd be happy to see them. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean here-- of the ones you've listed, the only widespread sources I can see are Nate News, Yonhap News (YNA), and Chosun Ilbo, none of which have coverage focused on said Webtoon. Though the KakaoPage website indicates that there's about 4 million subscribers to the Webtoon, I'd still argue delete here since I can't find any significant coverage that would warrant an article. MetropolitanIC (💬|📝) 02:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Coverage in a newspaper from Uganda [3], doesn't appear to be a "pay to publish" article, I suppose Ugandans watch South Korean online manga-type stories? Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
or a redirect to Kakao [4], the publisher? Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Observer.ug article is a coverage of a different comic. Red Storm is only mentioned. The second source is just a single-sentence announcement. Neocorelight (Talk) 01:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With this source I would probably support an article on the author, but it doesn't help much for this specific work. A redirect to a listing at Kakao Webtoon would be appropriate, yes. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I saw incorrectly, we do not have a list of Daum/Kakau webtoons. Probably for the best, as the Naver equivalent list is a mess. Deletion still feels like the correct choice. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 22 July 2024 (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.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Namethatisnotinuse Namethatisnotinuse (talk) 22:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion