Welcome to WikiProject Comics, a project formed by Wikipedians to increase, expand, improve, and better organize articles related to comics in Wikipedia, the largest encyclopedia in the world! We rely on comics enthusiasts worldwide to make this the best comics encyclopaedia on the web. If you are interested in participating, why not see how you can get involved?

If you would like to help, please inquire on the talk page and see the to-do list there.

For more information on WikiProjects, please see Wikipedia:WikiProjects and Wikipedia:WikiProject best practices.

Scope

The scope of WikiProject Comics is improve the vast expanse of knowledge that comics have become. This WikiProject will attempt to cover all comics-related information included on Wikipedia. We will do this through volunteer contributors and editors. If you are interested in joining the WikiProject, please feel free to add your name to the Participants list below, and find yourself an article to adopt.

Alerts

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(7 more...)

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Files for discussion

Miscellany for deletion

Featured article candidates

Good article nominees

Good topic candidates

Featured article reviews

Good article reassessments

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

Deletion discussions

To edit this section, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation
Miho (Sin City) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor comic character. The usual issues with WP:GNG - article is a plot summary + list of appearances; reception is very short (just two listicles). My BEFORE is of no help. WP:ATD-R gives us a plausible target: List of Sin City characters. (If anyone is interested in this series, note I've justed PRODed a bunch of characters/organizations; others will be nominated for AfD - right now I am not seeing any GNG for anything fictional from Template:Sin City. Feel free to deprod and redirect stuff to the list of characters, of course (or we can discuss them here). I am bringing Miho to AfD to notify folks interested in this (and also because she has the most references out of all of the Sin City articles, so it seems she is the 'best' out of this sorry bunch of, let's face it, WP:FANCRUFT). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roxxon Energy Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from the Marvel Universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of the Marvel Universe. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cross Technological Enterprises (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company most prominently related to Ant-Man. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of the Marvel Universe or Darren Cross (fictional founder, has its own article)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alchemax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from Spider Man universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; no reception). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of Spider-Man media if that article is kept (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of Spider-Man media); otherwise perhaps to (recently kept) Features of the Marvel Universe? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parker Industries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional company from Spider Man universe. Fails WP:GNG (just the usual plot summary and list of appearances; reception limited to two listicles). My BEFORE failed to find anything substantial. Per WP:ATD-R, could redirect (merge?) to Features of Spider-Man media if that article is kept (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of Spider-Man media); otherwise perhaps to (recently kept) Features of the Marvel Universe? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:15, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luna Snow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So after discovering this article, I wanted to do a hard dive into sources on it. However, upon digging...there's really next to nothing. Several articles are addressing the fact people thought she was a new character in Marvel Rivals, but they are carbon copies of one another: explaining the character's origin and usage, with no reception or discussion about her as a character itself. This article from Polygon felt like the strongest source, and what got my interest piqued to check for more, but even it barely discusses her, and is more about Iron Fist's redesign and Rivals.

Scholar also turned up nothing. She's a character in a vacuum, and while I'd rather be proven wrong I just can't find anything through a thorough WP:BEFORE to indicate she's notable. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Video games, and Comics and animation. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no immediate comment on deletion yet, but I am opening the possibility of a list of Marvel Rivals characters (comparable to the Overwatch one) given that they have spoken about including less well-known characters from the Marvel cannon, where notability outside of the game is unlikely. Most of the heroes in Rivals are notable before the game (even Jeff) but I am sure we'll see more. — Masem (t) 16:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't know if a list is really necessary compared to a table in the game's article for now, but once the cast grows I could see it as a good idea to do such a list.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that there is enough coverage of heroes as in the game to do a list with two paragraphs for each, one briefly summarizing the Canon of the character, and a second to cover their skill kit, as is done for the Overwatch ones. Judging by how the new heroes have been covered. This would also recent excessive game details on the individual char articles. But still thinking this through. — Masem (t) 20:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep [1] [2] [3] [4] (game guides can still qualify as SIGCOV as long as the article itself is not) as well as the other sources shown in the article, make me feel like this character is probably notable on her own. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 16:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There is sufficient coverage such as MSN, DEXERTO, Kotaku, Polygon, TechRadar etc. Drushrush (talk) 16:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • The first source is useless, it's a short note about fans of a niche game being upset about a price of a cosmetic item featuring her. It has nothing to do with her outside her being part of the said cosmetic. Second source is a bit longer but again, it focuses on mechanics of her character in a game, it's mostly useless for us. Third is more reliable and longer but it is still about her video game character in that particular game. Fourth is again about the game, but it is reliable and it goes beyond mechanics to discuss some cultural stuff. Fifth is a review of the cosmetic. Sigh. I am sorry, but those sources are not about Luna Snow, they are about Luna Snow (Marvel Rivals character). If this is all we have, then sadly, we cannot warrant keeping an article on her, but we could write up an article on the video game version of her character. Weird, I know... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: as per 4 sources above. AgerJoy talk 18:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Drushrush: @Zxcvbnm: @AgerJoy: While gameguide material can be used to establish character notability, it still needs to assert some importance outside of the game itself i.e. players being attacked for using Symmetra in Overwatch for how poor hers was or outright using her a troll pick to frustrate players. None of that is indicated here. There is also next to no discussion of the character as a fictional character outside of the Polygon article above, which is what we should be aiming for first and foremost. One needs to consider what the sources are saying for WP:SIGCOV, not that they simply exist.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. I do my best to look for any angle to justify an article's creation, but here, I find it uncompelling that all the sources are a combination of game guide discussion and/or offer limited commentary. I don't think it's a weak article situation, I've seen worse, but I would be more comfortable if there were stronger articles to cite. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect (and/or merge) per my analysis of sources above. What we have is mostly about video game character, not about the comic book character... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Toby the Tram Engine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dubious stand-alone WP:GNG (my BEFORE also failed to find anything except a passing mention here and there). No reception or analysis, the only non-plot content is found the the "Prototype and backstory" but it seems to be cobbled from WP:SIGCOV-failing mentions, mostly by the show's creator; and it is padded by general history of the real world J70 tram engine (aka GER Class C53). Per ATD I recommend redirecting this to List of characters in The Railway Series; perhaps with a merge of few relevant sentences from the non-plot section. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: notability and popularity of this article is attested by the large number of pages linking to it (see 'What links here'). Redirecting to List of characters in The Railway Series would necessarily obliterate virtually all of the content.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mean as custard (talkcontribs) 06:52, February 19, 2025 (UTC)
I am afraid this argument, a variation of WP:GOOGLEHITS (but on Wikipedia) is not going to get much traction - our standards are much higher than 10-15 years ago where such arguments were considered valid. See WP:ITSPOPULAR. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. This character is perhaps the most recognizable in the series after Thomas. Use of primary references, while raising eyebrows, doesn't necessitate deletion. I do agree with you that this page could use a cleanup though to remove some of the fluff. Kylemahar902 (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Harry Kloor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads a lot like a resume, tangentially mentioned in a few RS. Article may have been made for payment. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Live and learn. Here's what happened, and a good learning curve on this one. The article was created in 2008. It wasn't until 2022 that it was tagged for possible paid editing. With a gap of 14 years, how would anyone know it was paid editing? You see, when articles get tagged for anything, and without any backup proof, a tag is just a tag unless there is some proof. — Maile (talk) 03:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow me, please, to disagree with your observation about the importance of the length of time, i.e. "With a gap of 14 years, how would anyone know it was paid editing?" Well, information does not necessarily appear quickly. We might learn an article was made by a paid editor, or some other pertinent information, a considerable length of time after the article's creation, something for which I believe no examples need be given. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:17, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since subject despite the avalanche of citations, the supporting material does not stand up to close scrutiny. Scalpel, please.
Forensics: We can all agree that our subject is the first to obtain a double doctorate, per All the News That's Fit to Print, and by some obscure Russian website, for good measure - though, we must discard the dead links about that double doctorate stuff, such as this Arizona roadkill.
What else do we have? We have listings on a general theme, in which our subject is mentioned, such as this list of alumni, or routine listings of events, e.g. of speaking appearances, such as this; plus, news items that are similarly about something else and not of our subject, e.g. this report about an upcoming movie, whose screenplay is written by Kloor (mentioned once), or this one about a NASA project where our subject is listed as "workshop attendee", or a Captain's Log entry on a "Star Trek interactive science exhibit" where our subject is name dropped once, and so on. Anything else trawled up belongs to the aforepresented categories.
The strong aroma of vanity, whether intentional or not, is not a problem. After all, anyone can see there is no need for two photo-portraits or that we do not get year of birth. Nor is the fact that a major curator of the text is a kamikaze account. The problem is that we do not have enough sources. And arguments to the tune "Oh, he's obviously notable" do not wash. -The Gnome (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ravencroft (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional prison from Marvel/Spiderman verse. Pure plot summary and list of appearances. No reception, analysis, etc. The topic also has a section in Features of Spider-Man media (a problematic article that is currently discussed in its own AfD). I doubt we need even a single mention of this on Wikipedia outside a plot summary in some Spider-Man arc or comic; we certainly don't need two. This could be ATD-R to the mentioned article, but IMHO that one should be deleted as well, so... shrug. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Features of Spider-Man media. Though that article is up for AfD right now, the content will likely be merged to another article if merged, or kept around if kept, so I'm comfortable leaving a redirect here. Features of the Marvel Universe is also a decent merge target should that article be kept, but it's a bit up in the air right now given all these AfDs are active at the same time. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different proposed target articles right now. And the correct link to the Marvel AFD is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of the Marvel Universe (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Batcycle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pure plot summary and list of apperances; the bit on development is unreferenced and there is no reception, not even any listicles. Fails WP:GNG and my BEFORE failed to find anything that's not a plot summary. Since it's just plot, not seeing what we can do here except merge a few sentences (lead?) to Batman#Technology. (If anyone cares, Batsub was just blodly blanked and redirected looong time ago without any AfD... there was also a Batboat, I think). The concepts are mentioned briefly in the suggested redirect target - that's probably enough for now... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Daranios. Some decent hits, but nowhere near enough for a viable article, though viable merge targets exist. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:56, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Per WP:NEXIST. Got SIGCOV in Batman's Arsenal, Batman: The Ultimate Guide as well as an Article on the Batpod. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more out there, given this is Batman. A lack of willingness to perform improvements to an independently notable topic is not an excuse for deletion or merger, which should be done when something is non-notable or massively overlapping. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 16:52, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No offense, but these sources are almost entirely plot summary, with the exception of the Batpod, which is dev info that feels more fitting at the respective film's article. Guidebooks really can't help with Wikipedia:SIGCOV, as they're basically wholly plot summary, failing Wikipedia:NOTPLOT, as there's no content in there that shows how the subject has had a real-world impact. You can't even argue that the fact it was included in the guidebook was noteworthy, because the guidebooks include quite literally everything Batman-related, including several subjects deemed non-notable in past AfDs, such as the Batboat mentioned above.
    I will also note that this exact argument (including these exact sources, bar the Batpod one) was used in the Batboat AfD, where it was determined to redirect the article despite the presented coverage. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Supermobile (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very minor element of the Superman universe; short article, pure plot summary and list of appearances. Fails WP:GNG. No idea where this could redirect, but always open to consider redirection a viable alternative to hard deletion (closer, please note: if anyone suggests a target, consider me to support it). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant delete unless a merge target can be found. There's not really a good merge target for this. Perhaps to Superman#Merchandising given the one source mentioned here mentions it was used exclusively for that purpose? But even so it'd be a brief sentence. This is an extremely minor universe element, so there's not much to be retained here. If a good merge target is found I'll change my vote to merge, so ping me if something changes. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:56, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Features of Spider-Man media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Following from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of the Marvel Universe (3rd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Features of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, this is the last of those three fictional universe descriptions in a list form. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NLIST; Wikipedia articles are not places for pure plot summaries, and as a list, this is too broad (list of all fictional in-universe concepts related to Spider-Man). PS. Also, on the off chance this is kept, this would need renaming to the list of something format. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and consolidate into Spider-Man per Trailblazer. I was worried this would be some massive pile of information to sift through, but the info in the article is relatively concise. Barring the three locations with pre-existing articles, there are two schools and one prison. These locations contain a lot of unneeded information (Do we really need lists of minor characters without articles?) and can be trimmed quite easily to slot somewhere into the Spider-Man article. All locations, including those with articles, can be mentioned in brief there, with a summary explaining what each location is and why it is important to the Spider-Man mythos. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:53, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets WP:CSC point 2. Jclemens (talk) 08:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    CSC only applies if none meet notability, which is blatantly false when three of the article's entries have their own articles. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:01, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    An all-or-nothing rule seems ill-considered here, given that Wikipedia has tons of lists of instances for which some are notable and have articles while others are not (e.g., List of mayors of Florence). BD2412 T 17:23, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability of a list is often based on the notability of the subject group. Largely unfamiliar with your hyperlinked article, but an important governmental position is likely to be more covered in sources than a list of fictional locations with no sourcing showcasing real world relevance. Many of the subjects in the list are entirely non-notable, and the subject itself isn't notable, either. Notability should not be inherited from the few locations that are notable, either.
    Also note that CSC 2 says that "Before creating a stand-alone list, consider carefully whether such lists would be better placed within a "parent" article." CSC 2 isn't exactly a blanket keep statement, even if all the subjects fail notability. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:49, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    My reasoning here is that Spider-Man is an article on a specific fictional character, not the entire universe this character occupies, which is separately notable. Although this universe is a subset of the Marvel Comics universe it has locations and characters (many of these separately notable) that arise from it and that are specific to Spider-Man media. This is reflected in fact that there are three separate film franchises, including the 1970s one, around this character and their environs completely unconnected to the MCU or anything else Marvel. Of course, there is also the MCU-adjacent film series, which also reflects the locations and character specific to the Spider-Man universe. Perhaps the title of this article needs to be adjusted to reflect that or the criteria for inclusion of content needs to be clarified, but it will not be at all difficult to demonstrate GNG worthy coverage at this fictional world I've tried with the character itself. BD2412 T 18:46, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no indication the Universe of Spider-Man is a notable topic either, though. That's my main concern. Regardless of title, this is just a non-notable topic unless sourcing can be shown. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is why there should be allowed time to find sources to prove whether it is or not, rather than forcing an AfD with inconclusive information. This is something to hash out at the list talk, not here. AfD should be a last resort, not a garbage dumb to prove a point. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm personally of the mind that if it's at AfD, we may as well stick with the discussion while it's here, but I see your point. Decided to do a quick source run to double check details. There's a fair few hits in News for Sony's shared movie universe, but that's already covered at Sony's Spider-Man Universe, and when Sony is removed, there's not much outside of trivial Wikipedia:VALNET hits, which don't count toward notability. There's a brief hit here [10], but that's very short and more discussing characters than locations. Outside of that, Books has little bar trivial mentions using it as a buzzword for Spider-Man media. I can't view every scholar hit, but there seems to be a lot of hits on the multiverse in Spider-Man, but again that's an entirely different subject. There may be some hits I missed but I did take a look through everything I could and found little. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:45, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Whoa, I'm late to the party but WP:VALNET is the findings of WikiProject Video Games. At WP:RSPLIST, the only Valnet source listed is Screen Rant, which warns iirc that it should not be used for controversial BLP material. Collider, MovieWeb, CBR, there's nothing barring use of those to prove notability of a subject, akin to Behind the Voice Actors. BarntToust 13:41, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @BarntToust despite being used by Wikipedia:VG, their consensus is traditionally followed in regards to their assertion of Valnet's usability. Nearly every AfD I've been in has considered WP:VG's consensus as the gold standard for handling Valnet, and I've even seen it applied outside of AfDs too. Note also that RSPLIST is not a 100% inclusive list, as there are many sources not discussed there that are frequently used (or not used) sitewide, and in these cases project consensus is often used instead. If you want to discuss the usability of these sources, bring it up at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, as this is outside the scope of an AfD if you wish to challenge pre-existing consensus on source assessments. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep much as it is. Hyperbolick (talk) 23:33, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I mean seriously, this better be the last of these AFD abuses I find or you're going to ANI, dude. BarntToust 02:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @BarntToust Drop that tone and WP:REFACTOR yourself, or ANI it will be - for your violations of WP:CIV and WP:NPA. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:21, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Piotrus, you calling the work of the contributors "crap" is something that tells me you need to REFACTOR yourself, as no editor should be as brazen as you have been at these afds. Before you dig yourself into a bigger hole by getting pissy agitated with me, I strongly suggest you do as @Jclemens advised you on the MU afd; to quote them describing your conduct: deceptive, inappropriate, and your attitude is unbecomingly disrespectful to the people who build Wikipedia. Do better, and stop kicking sandcastles over just because you're an academic. BarntToust 03:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @BD2412, as you were saying on the MU AfD, what are your thoughts on this? BarntToust 03:47, 15 February 2025 (UTC) [reply]
    Jesus, Piotrus, you should know better than being confrontational to other editors. Please, WP:Assume good faith and don't pick fights. That is not what this discussion is for. I would happily report either one for derailing this discussion and being uncivil towards each other, so I hope it doesn't have to come to that. Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, I'm finna tap out and just fine-tune a page I've been working on. Sayonara. BarntToust 03:57, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm striking out some confrontational garbage I wrote. I got better things to write for better reasons. BarntToust 04:49, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For those who care, I have mended fences with BarnToust on my talk page - we are good. And I will also apologize for using the term 'crap'. While I consider the content in question to be low quality and IMHO mostly non-encyclopedic, I was too colloquial in my assessment :> Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Little support for outright deletion, but there is no apparent consensus on whether this should be standalone page. Keep or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have no objection to moving this to List of features of Spider-Man media, if that is all that it would take to resolve the question. BD2412 T 01:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @BD2412 But is it a list of media of a list of in-universe concepts? I mean, what are "features of media"? This name is just weird, compared to (closed as keep) Features of the Marvel Universe, which at least is clearly about the latter (in-universe stuff). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    PS. I'll ping @Trailblazer101, @Jclemens, @Hyperbolick, @BarntToust. If you want this kept, fine, but can you at least tell us what you think about the current name and scope of the article, and suggest a better name? Spider-Man universe? Features of Spider-Man universe? List of Spider-Man concepts? What is this supposed to be? Because at the very least, this is not about media. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If the title is an issue, I would be comfortable with either List of Spider-Man features, Features from the Spider-Man universe, or List of features in Spider-Man media. "Spider-Man universe" would be too ambiguous as it could also refer to the Spider-Verse or Sony's Spider-Man Universe, and I feel if we titled it with "concepts", then the scope would have to change to encompass the Spider-Verse, Symbiotes, cloning, etc. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Piotrus: You are misunderstanding "media" here, which I grant may be due to my use of the word in a jargony way. It just means the media in which the work is produced. This is a list of features originating in the comic books (as things relating to Spider-Man generally do) and then used in other Spider-Man media, such as TV series, video games, and films. BD2412 T 02:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Usually, Wikipedia terms "lists" as lists, while only excluding the term once the page becomes the host of built-out encyclopedic content. e.x. Characters of The Last of Us (TV series)—versus—List of Phineas and Ferb characters.
    In this case, however, I believe that adding verbiage to the title in order to differentiate a "list" from a "built out bastion of encyclopedic information"—that would just be, well, verbiage.
    I may wager that this specific page would require sources of literature on the subject, not just the WP:GOOGLETEST. Doesn't mean it's not notable, just means a different medium would need to be researched. BarntToust 13:13, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    List of features in Spider-Man media alternatively would be a fantastic title. BarntToust 13:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean either way the subject just isn't notable. Just because it's renamed doesn't change the fact there's no coverage on the topic of features, locations, or the universe of Spider-Man specifically, especially as a group, which is required for a list to meet standalone notability. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pokelego999: I think we are approaching this from very different mindsets, because to me this is like saying that the entirety of the world constructed around Spider-Man, apart from the character itself, is not notable, even though the same set of fictional locations and environs are re-used throughout many different adaptations of the original property into many different media. BD2412 T 17:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @BD2412 just because they are re-used does not mean they are instantly notable. We need sources to back up notability, none of which are demonstrated here. As I said before, there may be sources on individual concepts (Stuff like Daily Bugle and Oscorp, though I admittedly haven't checked for those) or on related concepts (Like the multiverse in Spider-Man) but if there's no sourcing on a topic, in this case the Spider-Man universe, than it's just non-notable, regardless of any assumed assertions of notability. If you can provide sources to back up your claims I'd be willing to potentially reconsider, but right now you're basically saying Wikipedia:ITSNOTABLE and nothing more. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:01, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There is literally a New York Times article cited on this page just about Aunt May's house. Most of the locations detailed in this article are included in Sanderson, Peter (2007). The Marvel Comics Guide to New York City. New York City: Pocket Books. pp. 30–33, 221–22. ISBN 978-1-4165-3141-8. Retrieved 18 July 2015.. This is sourced. BD2412 T 19:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability of the concept is not INHERITED from the notability of individual locations. Regardless of whether its a standalone article or a list, coverage must be shown of that article's primary topic specifically. If it's a list, coverage must be shown of the subject as a group for it to meet notability. Using today's FA as an example, Tesla and unions is notable because there's coverage of Tesla's relationship with labor unions specifically. If all the coverage was about one specific union and nothing else, we'd have an article on that union, and not an article on an overall topic that doesn't have coverage. For an example from something I've been working on recently, we have articles on individual games in the Pokémon Stadium series, but not an overall series article. This is because there is no coverage on the series as a whole, but there is enough coverage on the individual games that each can sustain an article. If Aunt May's house has the coverage for an article, so be it, but that does not mean the Spider-Man universe, or the features of said universe, are notable because Aunt May's house is.
    As for your book, I can't gauge much of the exact content of that book you're citing because it's paywalled, so there may be some SIGCOV on the entire concept of a Spider-Man universe or locations independently of the Marvel Universe in there, but that can't really be gauged unless you have access to the book and can provide exact quotations within it. If it's just the concept of individual locations being discussed (Obviously don't know if this is in the book or not, but if the coverage is just on Oscorp or the Daily Bugle specifically and nothing else, for example) and not the overall concept, that still falls into the pitfalls I've mentioned above regardless of what kind of source it's coming from. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:21, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pokelego999: It is not paywalled for me. There are four full pages on Empire State University, and two lines in that section discussing Midtown High School. Later in the book there are two full pages on Ravencroft Asylum. BD2412 T 03:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    While that doesn't really help the case of showing subject notability, I'd bring up the Ravencroft pages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ravencroft. I don't know how helpful they'll be, given it's the only source of any substance so far, but it may be worth mentioning in case it can help there. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or merge per WP:ATD. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NLIST due to a lack of independent reliable sources. At best, "Features of X" is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of "X", if you recycle most of the same independent reliable sourced to dig into the WP:TRIVIA.
In the interest of finding a compromise, I note that there is a Spider-man article that mashes together the character and the fiction itself. I'd normally consider it to be a WP:REDUNDANTFORK to split the titular character from the franchise, but it is not without precedent in exceptional cases, like James Bond and James Bond (literary character). If there's a way to re-organize this information (while removing the unsourced information), this may be a way to achieve that. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shooterwalker: I would note that Features of Spider-Man media is itself a subset of Features of the Marvel Universe (just SNOW-kept at AfD), but that article is already coming up on 140K, so a subset would logically be split off from it anyway. I would have no objection to having an article on the character separate from the setting(s), but that would ultimately amount to a renaming and perhaps restructuring of this article. I would also note that Marvel tends to reuse entities established in Spider-Man media, so that other characters and storylines develop in connection with those entities with increasingly tertiary ties to Spider-Man, though Spider-Man remains the primary character of significance to those entities. BD2412 T 21:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The content is still intrinsically tied to the Marvel universe. Additionally, every location on the Spider-Man article is already listed at the main Features article, barring Aunt May's house and Midtown High. Simply merge both of those entries over, cut out the unneeded fluff from Midtown (Like the student lists, which are unnecessary for a number of reasons) and the content as present slots in just fine. It shouldn't drastically increase the amount of bytes in the article, and if the article is at size capacity, it may be worth trying to see how information should be reorganized first before additional splits are made (For instance, does that parent article really need lists of objects used by prominent superheroes? Those can just be redirected to the parent superhero). Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:36, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Marvel Universe is big enough to warrant one article about its setting, but we have three (Cinamatic and this one). I hope one day we can reduce it to one, without too much information loss (that said, given it's pretty much all plot summary, shrug, Fandom does WP:FANCRUFT better anyway). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Buzz (DC Thomson) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I redirected based on there being only a database source. This was undone, and a new source (this book) was added. That book comes from an author and publisher who do not seem to be notable as I can barely find any info on either, and the book itself appears to be full of reprinted comics and no valuable prose. There's also little to suggest notability of this subject, nor the few bluelinked strips listed here. This appears to be a subject of very niche interest, and probably not something that would've gotten a ton of coverage. I would stick with the redirect to The Topper (comics). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is a short running comic (not even 2 years starting in 1973) but it was being reprinted (and advertised on the front cover) as part of Classic of the Comics up until 2010. That's near 40 (not continuous) years as part of national publications. I know the source I added isnt the best but its more than just reprinted comics, its a complete index of the Topper comic that Buzz merged into. I'm going to have a look for more sources. Eopsid (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some more sources, I think there are more out there in other books. Eopsid (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Kibble-White's Ultimate Book of British Comics has something like 4 pages on it, Gifford's Character Encyclopedia probably covers half-a-dozen plus strips (with his two catalogues possibly good for the odd cite), it might be covered in Cadogan's DCT book (been a while since I read that one) and all of this is without bothering to look at any specialist magazines - Crikey! almost certainly ran at least one article on it. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if it absolutely has to be redirected somewhere because people don't like comics, the list of DC Thomson publications makes a lot more sense than to The Topper, which is just confusing. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Topper seems like a fine target to me since Buzz was merged into it, and that merger is mentioned in The Topper's lead. List of D. C. Thomson & Co. Ltd publications only mentions the name and years of publication, so it's less valuable in terms of how much information is supplied. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 12:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
List of boats in The Adventures of Tintin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So, there's some interesting stuff here in the form of well written and referenced text on "The maritime world in The Adventures of Tintin", but this is wrapped in fancrufty and poorly referenced list that fails WP:NLIST (and while the list appears to have plenty of footnotes, many are just unreferenced notes or commentary). As a list, I think his has no reason to exist, but the content could probably be merged somewhere, or maybe split (or perhaps we could just delete the list part of this article and rename it?). It's a weird case, I've very rarely seen some good content bundled with bad one in such a way... If this is somehow kept, obviously, this is not a list of boats, but ships (or ships and boats?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in the hopes of finding a more definitive consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BD2412 T 02:06, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The book citation provided by Mushy Yank, as well as other secondary sources that are already in the article, indicate that the ships have been discussed as a group, therefore alleviating the main concern of the nominator and the other delete voters. Simply citing the policy without explaining why it violates NLIST like some have done here is a very poor deletion rationale. Obviously, the article needs to be renamed to List of ships in The Adventures of Tintin, but all of the issues in the article can be resolved through editing and are not indicative of a fundamental flaw that warrants full deletion. Billclinton1996 (talk) 07:31, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge some of the content on Secret of the Unicorn and Red Sea Sharks to their respective articles. I was somewhat hesitant, but a deeper look at the sources reveals that there is quite literally only one piece of SIGCOV, that being the book Yank mentioned above. Much of the dev info is about individual ships COATRACKED together, and not as the discussion of boats as a whole. Some of this info is worthwhile for preservation at individual subjects, but one SIGCOV piece and a lot of COATRACKING just isn't enough to base an entire article on. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 15:50, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Billclinton1996. Christian75 (talk) 20:39, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
George DiCaprio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTINHERITED, George here is only known in connection with his famous son Leonardo DiCaprio. His "acting debut" is a very small few second cameo, his work as a writer/artist (not really clear) fails WP:ARTIST and his work as a filmmaker fails WP:FILMMAKER, getting a small stint editing on local newspapers does not make you notable. Source 5 in the article shows he's worked on... three comics? Don't know if it's even reliable as a source but clearly not noteworthy in itself. jolielover♥talk 14:54, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He stills fails WP:AUTHOR, as none of his work in the bibliography is notable. jolielover♥talk 03:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ. The entire underground comix movement was designed to change people's perceptions of what stories were "worth" telling in the comics format, so many products of that era fail a mainstream definition of "notablity". Nonetheless, the material produced during that era changed the comics industry forever, heralding the alternative comics movement and the rise of the graphic novel. That history has been well established. DiCaprio's role during that time as a writer, publisher, editor, and distributor is also well-established. Not to mention that he collaborated with such "notable" artists as Justin Green and Jay Kinney, and contributed to anthologies such as Arcade and Slow Death. -- User:Mikeross22 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yours is an admirably expressive and nuanced opinion. However, our own take matters very little as far as a person's notability is concerned. Sources rule-The Gnome (talk) 20:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because there are at least three good sources. However, there are several sources that need to be removed and the article tagged as needing better sources, if it is kept. Bearian (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It isn't about the sources, obviously Leonardo DiCaprio's dad is going to have a plethora of articles about him no matter what he did. The issue is that he has no notability outside of being Leo's father. jolielover♥talk 05:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:38, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion

Requested moves, merges, and splits

To edit these sections, see moves, merges, and splits

Requested moves

Proposed merges


Proposed splits

Recent creations

Bot generated

This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.

Rules | Match log | Results page (for watching) | Last updated: 2025-02-22 20:32 (UTC)

Note: The list display can now be customized by each user. See List display personalization for details.















Human generated

To edit this section, go to this page


April 2011

August 2010

July 2010

June 2010

Cleanup

Quality

The project has 17 featured articles. 7 of them, or 41.2%, are flagged for cleanup.

ArticleMaintenance categories
300 (film) «FA» Articles with dead external links (Jan 2009)
Captain Marvel (DC Comics) «FA, High» Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008)
Megatokyo «FA» Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009)
Roy of the Rovers «FA» Articles needing additional references (Aug 2009), Articles with dead external links (Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2009)
Superman (film series) «FA» Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2009)
The Adventures of Tintin «FA, Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008)
Watchmen «FA, High» Articles to be merged (Aug 2009)

The project has 1 featured lists. None of them is flagged for cleanup.

A-Class articles

The project has 2 A-Class articles. None of them is flagged for cleanup.

Good articles

The project has 71 good articles. 7 of them, or 9.9%, are flagged for cleanup.

ArticleMaintenance categories
Barbara Gordon «GA» Vague or ambiguous time
Clara Elsene Peck «GA» Articles with dead external links (Aug 2009)
Hergé «GA, High» Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2007)
Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy «GA» Cleanup (Jun 2009)
Michigan State University libraries «GA» Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2007)
The Transformers (IDW Publishing) «GA» Articles that may contain original research (Aug 2009)
Wanted (2008 film) «GA» Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009)

Importance

Top-importance articles

The project has 57 top-importance articles. 35 of them, or 61.4%, are flagged for cleanup.

ArticleMaintenance categories
Alan Moore «Top» Articles with minor POV problems (Mar 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2009)
Alternative comics «Top» Articles lacking sources (Oct 2008)
American comic book «Top» Articles needing additional references (Oct 2007), Articles that may contain original research (Jul 2009), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Apr 2007, Oct 2007, Nov 2007, May 2008, Jun 2009)
Archie Andrews (comics) «Top» Articles needing additional references (Feb 2009), Articles with trivia sections (Jan 2008), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Dec 2007)
Archie Comics «Top» Articles to be split (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Oct 2008)
Carl Barks «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007)
Cartoonist «Top» Articles lacking sources (May 2009)
Cerebus the Aardvark «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2007, Feb 2008, Jul 2008, Feb 2009, Mar 2009, May 2009)
Comics «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2008)
Comics Code Authority «Top» Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2007
Comic book «Top» Articles lacking reliable references (Nov 2007), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Mar 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Oct 2007)
Comic strip «Top» Articles lacking in-text citations (May 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2007, Apr 2008, May 2009)
DC Comics «Top» Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Mar 2009, Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Nov 2007, Dec 2008, Aug 2009)
Dilbert «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Jul 2008)
Doonesbury «Top» Articles needing additional references (Jan 2007), Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2008)
Fantastic Four «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2007, Jan 2009, Feb 2009)
Graphic novel «Top» Articles lacking reliable references (Jun 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (May 2008), Cleanup (Jun 2009), Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Jun 2009), Wikipedia introduction cleanup
Jack Kirby «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2008, Nov 2008, May 2009)
Jean Giraud «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2008)
Justice League «Top» Articles needing additional references (Aug 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Aug 2009), Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (May 2009)
Little Nemo «Top» Articles lacking sources (May 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Mar 2009)
Mad (magazine) «Top» Articles with unsourced statements (May 2009)
Manga «Top» Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2007
Marvel Comics «Top» Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Jun 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2007, Apr 2008, Feb 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009), Current events (Sep 2009)
Osamu Tezuka «Top» Articles needing additional references (Oct 2007), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Mar 2008)
Peanuts «Top» Articles needing additional references (Oct 2008), Articles with dead external links (May 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Jun 2007, Mar 2008)
Penciller «Top» Articles needing additional references (May 2009)
Popeye «Top» Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Jan 2009, Jul 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2007, Apr 2008, Oct 2008, Jan 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009)
Robert Crumb «Top» Articles lacking in-text citations (Apr 2009)
Stan Lee «Top» Articles lacking in-text citations (Jan 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Dec 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Aug 2008, Dec 2008, Jan 2009, Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
The Adventures of Tintin «FA, Top» Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008)
The Family Circus «Top» Articles needing additional references (Apr 2008)
Will Eisner «Top» Articles needing additional references (Mar 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2008, Jul 2009)
Wonder Woman «Top» Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008, Nov 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009)
X-Men «Top» Articles needing additional references (Feb 2007)

High-importance articles

The project has 378 high-importance articles. 214 of them, or 56.6%, are flagged for cleanup. A detailed listing is suppressed due to size restrictions.

Listing by number of categories assigned

Articles with 13 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
Mister Fantastic «High» Articles lacking reliable references (May 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles to be expanded (Dec 2008), Articles with peacock terms, Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2008, Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (May 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (May 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (May 2009)

Articles with 12 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
Sabretooth (comics) Articles needing additional references (Sep 2008, Feb 2009), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with dead external links (Jan 2009, Feb 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Jan 2009, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009), Cleanup (Aug 2007), Comics articles needing issue citations

Articles with 11 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
Green Goblin «High» Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2009, Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009), Cleanup (Jan 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Jan 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (May 2009), Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (May 2009)

Articles with 10 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
Fictional history of Wolverine Articles lacking reliable references (Apr 2008), Articles needing additional references (Jul 2009), Articles to be expanded (Mar 2009), Articles to be split (Feb 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Feb 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Comics articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction
Juggernaut (comics) Articles needing additional references (Sep 2008), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles to be split (Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Kryptonite «High» Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2007, Feb 2008, Mar 2008, Apr 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2008, Feb 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Mar 2008)
Mystique (comics) Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Mar 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing clarification (Apr 2009), Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Mar 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Mar 2009)
Stan Lee «Top» Articles lacking in-text citations (Jan 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Dec 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Aug 2008, Dec 2008, Jan 2009, Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Super Friends Articles lacking sources (Oct 2008), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Mar 2009), Articles with trivia sections (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2008, Oct 2008, Jan 2009, Mar 2009, Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing clarification (Mar 2009)
X-Force Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2008), Articles to be expanded (Feb 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, May 2007, Sep 2008), Cleanup (Sep 2008), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Sep 2008), Wikipedia laundry list cleanup

Articles with 9 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
American comic book «Top» Articles needing additional references (Oct 2007), Articles that may contain original research (Jul 2009), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Apr 2007, Oct 2007, Nov 2007, May 2008, Jun 2009)
Beast Wars Neo Articles lacking sources (Aug 2007), Articles that may contain original research (Aug 2007, Sep 2007), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2007), Cleanup (Aug 2007), Transformers articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Aug 2007), Wikipedia laundry list cleanup
Beavis and Butt-head Articles lacking reliable references (Jan 2009), Articles needing additional references (Jan 2009), Articles with sections that need to be turned into prose, Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Jan 2008, Jan 2009, Jun 2009), Cleanup (Jan 2007, Jun 2009)
Brainiac (comics) Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Jul 2008, Oct 2008, Feb 2009, Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Vague or ambiguous time, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Jul 2008, Oct 2008)
Dazzler Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2007, Mar 2008, Apr 2008, Jun 2008, Oct 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Jean Grey «High» Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Jan 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Jun 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Jun 2009)
Krypton (comics) Articles lacking reliable references (Apr 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Jul 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Mar 2009), Articles with too many examples, Articles with unsourced statements (Dec 2006, Feb 2007, Feb 2008, Nov 2008)
Luke Cage Articles needing additional references (Dec 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2008, Oct 2008, Mar 2009, Apr 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Magneto (comics) «High» Articles lacking reliable references (Aug 2009), Articles needing additional references (Dec 2008, Jan 2009), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Jun 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Comics articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Wikipedia articles with incorrect tenses
Nick Fury «High» Articles with trivia sections (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2007, Oct 2007, Aug 2008, Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Popeye «Top» Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Jan 2009, Jul 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2007, Apr 2008, Oct 2008, Jan 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009)
Professor X «High» Articles that may contain original research (Nov 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (Jan 2008, Aug 2009)
She-Hulk Articles needing additional references (Jul 2008), Articles needing more detailed references, Articles with unsourced statements (Jul 2008, Oct 2008, Dec 2008, Apr 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Sovereign Seven Articles lacking sources (Oct 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2008, Oct 2008), Cleanup (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Oct 2008), Wikipedia introduction cleanup
Uatu Articles lacking reliable references (May 2009), Articles that may contain original research (May 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with peacock terms, Articles with unsourced statements (May 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (May 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (May 2009)
WildStorm Productions «High» Articles needing additional references (Jun 2007, Aug 2008), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (May 2009, Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Jun 2007, Feb 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009)

Articles with 8 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
Beast (comics) Articles lacking reliable references (Jan 2008), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009, Sep 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (Nov 2008)
Bullseye (comics) Articles to be expanded (Mar 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Dec 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles with incorrect tenses
Comic book «Top» Articles lacking reliable references (Nov 2007), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Mar 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Oct 2007)
Frank Miller (comics) «High» Articles lacking reliable references (Oct 2007, Dec 2008), Articles that may contain original research (Oct 2007), Articles to be expanded (Aug 2007), Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2008, Dec 2008, Jan 2009), BLP articles lacking sources
Kingpin (comics) «High» Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Apr 2009)
Magik (comics) Articles lacking sources (Apr 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2008, Sep 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Cleanup (Mar 2009, Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Nightcrawler (comics) Articles needing additional references (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2007, Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Comics articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction
S.H.I.E.L.D. Articles lacking reliable references (Jan 2009), Articles needing additional references (Jan 2009), Articles with trivia sections (Jul 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Jan 2009, Jul 2009)
Silver Surfer «High» Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with dead external links (Aug 2009), Articles with improper non-free content, Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Superhero «High» Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2007), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Mar 2007, Oct 2007, Nov 2007, Jan 2008, Jul 2008, Jan 2009)
Surge (comics) Articles needing additional references (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2007, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009), Cleanup (Sep 2007), Comics articles needing cleanup, Comics articles needing issue citations
The Cisco Kid Articles to be expanded (Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Aug 2009), Cleanup (Aug 2009), Wikify (Aug 2009), Wikipedia articles needing clarification (Aug 2009), Wikipedia articles needing reorganization, Wikipedia articles needing rewrite (Aug 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Aug 2009)
Thing (comics) «High» Articles needing additional references (Oct 2006), Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2007, Jun 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Tokyopop Articles lacking reliable references (Dec 2007), Articles needing expert attention (Feb 2009), Cleanup (Mar 2007, Dec 2007), Miscellaneous articles needing expert attention, Wikipedia articles in need of updating, Wikipedia articles needing reorganization, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Dec 2007)

Articles with 7 cleanup categories assigned

ArticleMaintenance categories
A Modest Destiny Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2006, Articles lacking reliable references (Sep 2007), Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2007), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2007), Articles with sections that need to be turned into prose, Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007), Cleanup (Sep 2007)
Black Widow (Marvel Comics) Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Cannonball (comics) Articles lacking reliable references (Jan 2008), Articles needing additional references (Mar 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (Nov 2008)
Electro (Marvel Comics) Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2008, Jan 2009, Apr 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Comics articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction
Forge (comics) Articles with unsourced statements (Jan 2008, Nov 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Hal Jordan «High» Articles lacking reliable references (Aug 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Mar 2009), Articles with dead external links (May 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Mar 2007, Mar 2009), Wikipedia articles needing clarification (Mar 2009)
Jesse Blaze Snider Articles lacking reliable references (Mar 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009, May 2009), Cleanup (Mar 2009), NPOV disputes (Mar 2009), Wikify (Mar 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Mar 2009)
List of characters in Megatokyo Articles lacking reliable references (Jul 2008), Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2008, Dec 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with trivia sections (Feb 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Sep 2008), Cleanup (Jul 2008)
List of DC Multiverse worlds «High» Articles with dead external links (Dec 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (May 2008, Sep 2008, Nov 2008, Aug 2009), Wikipedia articles needing clarification (Jul 2009), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Nov 2008)
List of female comics creators Articles needing additional references (Jan 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2008, Jun 2008, Jul 2008, Aug 2008, Sep 2008), Cleanup (Jan 2009)
List of Green Lanterns Articles lacking sources (Aug 2009), Articles that may contain original research (Feb 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles to be merged (Apr 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Feb 2009)
Manga outside Japan «High» Articles that may contain original research (Jun 2009), Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009, Jun 2009, Aug 2009), Vague or ambiguous time
Marvel Comics «Top» Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases (Jun 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2007, Apr 2008, Feb 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009), Current events (Sep 2009)
Marvel Nemesis: Rise of the Imperfects (comics) Articles lacking reliable references (Oct 2008), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Cleanup (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Oct 2008), Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (Oct 2008), Wikipedia introduction cleanup
Mary Jane Watson «High» Articles lacking in-text citations (Oct 2008), Articles needing additional references (Mar 2008, Jul 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing style editing (Apr 2008), Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention (Apr 2009)
Meggan Articles needing additional references (Sep 2008), Articles that may contain original research (Sep 2009), Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Sep 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
One Year Later Articles lacking reliable references (Aug 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Apr 2009, May 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
Rachel Summers Articles needing additional references (Apr 2009, May 2009), Articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction, Articles with unsourced statements (Nov 2008, Jul 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations, Wikipedia articles needing copy edit (Jun 2009)
Reboot (fiction) Accuracy disputes (Apr 2009), Articles needing additional references (Oct 2007, Dec 2007, May 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Apr 2009, May 2009, Jun 2009)
Richard Branson Articles with dead external links (Mar 2009), Articles with unsourced statements (Feb 2007, Apr 2007, Jun 2007, Jul 2007, Oct 2008, Aug 2009)
Rogue (comics) Articles to be expanded (Sep 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Oct 2008, Apr 2009, May 2009, Jul 2009, Aug 2009), Comics articles needing issue citations
X-Men: The Manga Articles lacking sources (Oct 2008), Articles to be expanded (Jul 2008, Oct 2008), Articles with sections that need to be turned into prose, Cleanup (Apr 2007, Oct 2008), Wikify (Jun 2008)