Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goblin (Marvel Comics): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 22:32, 7 December 2019

Goblin (Marvel Comics)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Collection of several unrelated topics with the same name. Notability for the whole of any of them is not established. TTN (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Not even remotely unrelated. The "Goblin" family is a notable lineage of supervillains in the Marvel Universe that are connected to one another. There have even recent storylines (such as "Goblin Nation") where the premise is Norman Osborn or some iteration of the Hobgoblin leading an army of all the different goblins. Virtually all of them are also tied to the Osborn bloodline or the Goblin formula in some way. Given that many of these characters are also notable enough to have articles of their own, there is no basis for a deletion. The deletion rationale is presumptuous and misinformed. Dark Knight 2149 22:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's the Goblin-themed characters, related characters through the "Goblin Formula", and sets of actual goblins. Three different headers of unrelated characters. None of them establish notability. Even if you reduce this to the Goblin-themed characters, they do not currently establish notability as a group. TTN (talk) 22:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, wrong. I just scrolled through the entire list, and literally every single character on there is connected to Norman Osborn or the Goblin formula. And the subject matter is definitely notable enough to maintain the hub page. Many of the characters even have articles of their own. Your rationale is objectively false. Dark Knight 2149 22:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to be pedantic, yes the "Goblin Formula" itself is related to the Goblin-themed, but the characters are not directly related to the themed characters. You're also ignoring "Goblins (species)." But at the end of the day, this is a pointless discussion because this article still fails WP:GNG. You're trying to frame this as some ignorant assault on comics, but GNG is all that matters. TTN (talk) 22:32, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 * '''Oppose:''' Not even remotely unrelated. The "Goblin" family is a notable lineage of supervillains in the Marvel Universe that are connected to one another. There have even recent storylines (such as "Goblin Nation") where the premise is Norman Osborn or some iteration of the Hobgoblin leading an army of all the different goblins. Virtually all of them are also tied to the Osborn bloodline or the Goblin formula in some way. Given that many of these characters are also notable enough to have articles of their own, there is no basis for a deletion. The deletion rationale is presumptuous and misinformed. '''[[User:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">Dark</span>]][[User talk:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:black;">Knight</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">2149</span>]]''' 22:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 :*There's the Goblin-themed characters, related characters through the "Goblin Formula", and sets of actual goblins. Three different headers of unrelated characters. None of them establish notability. Even if you reduce this to the Goblin-themed characters, they do not currently establish notability as a group. [[User:TTN|TTN]] ([[User talk:TTN|talk]]) 22:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
-:: Again, wrong. I just scrolled through the entire list, and literally every single character on there is connected to Norman Osborn or the Goblin formula. And the subject matter is definitely notable enough to maintain the hub page. Many of the characters even have articles of their own. Your rationale is objectively false. '''[[User:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">Dark</span>]][[User talk:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:black;">Knight</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">2149</span>]]''' 22:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
+::: Again, wrong. I just scrolled through the entire list, and literally every single character on there is connected to Norman Osborn or the Goblin formula. And the subject matter is definitely notable enough to maintain the hub page. Many of the characters even have articles of their own. Your rationale is objectively false. '''[[User:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">Dark</span>]][[User talk:Darkknight2149|<span style="color:black;">Knight</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Darkknight2149|<span style="color:grey;">2149</span>]]''' 22:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
+::::If you want to be pedantic, yes the "Goblin Formula" itself is related to the Goblin-themed, but the characters are not directly related to the themed characters. You're also ignoring "Goblins (species)." But at the end of the day, this is a pointless discussion because this article still fails [[WP:GNG]]. You're trying to frame this as some ignorant assault on comics, but GNG is all that matters. [[User:TTN|TTN]] ([[User talk:TTN|talk]]) 22:32, 7 December 2019 (UTC)