Talk:List of Marvel Comics characters: D

Merge

Dark Mother can be merged here briefly, it does not need to be deleted. 73.168.15.161 (talk) 11:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

"Daze (comics)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Daze (comics). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 18#Daze (comics) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 2pou (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Dogpool Merge Discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was don't merge. Di (they-them) (talk) 01:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

---

While reading the article for Deadpool & Wolverine, I noticed Dogpool got an article. However, the article is tiny and has little to nothing inside of it showing notability of the subject. For a subject with a wider history a split of this substance can be semi-understandable, but Dogpool has very little comics history to its name and only one movie appearance, with both having small roles. Any notability from Dogpool hails from routine coverage of Deadpool & Wolverine, which very much suffers from the fact that all of this coverage is either covering the film or the casting of Peggy (dog). Peggy seems to be a notable subject, but a character having a notable actor does not make the character instantly notable, and there is very little discussion surrounding the character itself from a search I undertook that doesn't revolve around Peggy's casting or brief mentions that Dogpool is popular. The discussion around Dogpool is so small that I cannot reasonably see why this needs to be split from List of Marvel Comics characters: D, where the current article can be slotted in its entirety without threatening undue weight due to its small size. I do not see anything in Dogpool's coverage that justifies a separate split here.

TLDR: The coverage here is so sparse and short in nature that it can be easily merged into this article without difficulty, with very little rationale for a split off this character list. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Almost forgot: Pinging @Di (they-them) as page creator. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose merging. Personally I disagree. I think that Dogpool has enough coverage to pass GNG, and there are sources cited that cover the character in the comics, not just the film. Also, I think it's kind of poor timing to even discuss this considering the page is currently approved for DYK. Di (they-them) (talk) 02:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh shoot, sorry about that. I had no clue it was at DYK. Still, my main concern is less with GNG and moreso if there's really a reason to split it. Just because it's notable doesn't mean having a split is necessary, especially when the subject could easily function as a list entry with little detriment. There's nothing really gained via a split given the simplicity of the character and its impact. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 05:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose merge: This passes GNG, though it can always benefit from an expansion. I don't think we should send every single article that is a start or stub-class to the list as that just overloads it. If anything, it is good that we are able to split off some entries from the list into their own articles. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

My concern is less so with start and stub class articles and moreso pages with no room for expansion. Much of the content of Dogpool is much of the same content, basically being "Dogpool was played by Peggy" and "Dogpool is funny," with little additional context. These are simple statements that are easy to merge, and while they can be expanded, it's very much overcite and bloat when the sources all say the same thing. This entry is small enough where it wouldn't overbloat the list, unlike many other comics character articles where that is a valid concern (Tbh these lists need an entire overhaul; I wish I had enough in and out comic knowledge to do it myself) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 05:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the Dogpool page does have room for expansion, especially considering that Marvel just launched a new comic series about him. Di (they-them) (talk) 15:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

The argument of a new series coming out is very much something we can't predict in terms of Reception. It may make Dogpool an icon or it'll be glossed over entirely. I think a rebrand with the article covering Dogpool's series as well as the character might be viable given most comic series tend to have Reception by themselves (As I've seen other articles such as Kamala Khan cover literary reception in the article, for example), but I'm admittedly unsure myself. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

It's true that we don't know how the comic will be received in the future, but that's exactly why I think it's wrong to say the page has "no room for expansion". It's a statement that implies that the new comic can't or won't have any impact on sourcing, which we cannot say for sure. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:18, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Either way, I feel the series may be more relevant than the character. We don't know the character's Reception, and almost all of it will be tied to Dogpool's comic run's notability instead of to its own separate notability. I do feel it may be better if the article functioned as both Reception for the series overall as well as the character, since then it covers both topics that may not be notable separately in a way that makes sense without risking Wikipedia:COATRACK. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support per WP:NOPAGE; I think this, basically three-para-long, near-stub would benefit from being in a list. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.