Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Fury in other media
- 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. IMO the policy based arguments are the delete votes but there is clearly no consensus to delete Spartaz Humbug! 16:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Nick Fury in other media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unnecessary article split. This information should be summarized in the main article. We do not need a list of every trivial appearance of the character. The MCU rendition has its own article. The sources in the article are largely promotional or trivial mentions for satisfying WP:V, so there is nothing here to make the topic of "Nick Fury in other media" notable. Unless this should be reformatted into "List of media featuring Nick Fury," this has no reason to exist. I don't particularly think a general encyclopedia has a duty to categorize the every appearance of every single fictional character outside of extensive real world context making it necessary on a per character basis. TTN (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The citations are very unclear and the article also doesn’t explain it that well, ~Cupper (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep - Nick Fury in other media already does a good job of summarising everything without going into excruciating detail. There's also no way that this would all fit onto the main page. And yes, "In other media" sections are expected to cover all of a character's appearance across multiple forms of media. The only things that don't get covered are brief cameos and trivial references/non-appearances.
- Nick Fury's history and appearances through various forms of media are covered extensively by reliable sources as well. More than anything, this looks like fishing around for the next big nomination spree. Darkknight2149 19:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- "Character in other media" is also the community-wide standard for articles like this and it has been discussed in the past. If you have a problem with this title format, that is not a concern for AFD. AFD is not clean-up or an activism page for any problems you have with how articles are procedurally handled. Darkknight2149 19:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Internal project consensus does not matter if the article content fails policies and/or guidelines. As an article, this fails WP:GNG. As a list, it fails WP:LISTN. This does not inherent notability from the parent article because it is not necessary information and the parent article is not too large to accommodate a reasonable summary. Fictional information needs to be summarized if there is no contextual real world information making that necessary. "Brief cameos and trivial references" is a subjective measure of importance, and I would gauge most of this list to be of that level of triviality in the scope of a general encyclopedia. This topic deserves one to three paragraphs in the main article summarizing the most important points. TTN (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- The only problem is that it fails neither of those. Nick Fury's history of being adapted into various forms of media is well documented and covered by reliable sources. If anything, WP:LISTN only supports a keep vote, because it specifies directly "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been."
This is also incorrect. On top of passing LISTN, the list already is summarised reasonably and doesn't go into unnecessary detail at all. Your insistence that it is "unnecessary information" and "trivial" in itself is a subjective measure of importance, and one that doesn't align with community consensus. "In other media" sections are expected to cover the character's history of appearing in other media. It is "trivial" when we are dealing with cameos and passing references. Fiction is one of the topics covered by Wikipedia. Darkknight2149 20:24, 16 November 2020 (UTC)This does not inherent notability from the parent article because it is not necessary information and the parent article is not too large to accommodate a reasonable summary.
- The topic of “Nick Fury in other media” is not notable as a group or individually. That individual pieces of other pieces of media may be talked about is not an indication that this particular topic as a whole has achieved notability. For that, you would need sources specifically talking about the character in mass media as a whole, separate from the comics, which seems impossibly specific. Otherwise, such sources contribute only to the notability of the character.
- All fiction needs to be summary style. If the content is exceeding its weight in the main article and lacks the notability to stand alone, then it is not necessary. That indicates the need to trim the section down to its most important parts as indicated by coverage in sources. Listing appearances in which the character is not titular figure is absolutely not a necessary split. TTN (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Read the article. It already is summary-style, and per WP:LISTN, only the general topic needs extensive secondary coverage (which it has). On top of that, the appearances themselves act as primary sources and you can likely find most (if not all) of the appearances discussed in the many sources covering this topic anyway. It honestly feels like you're looking for an excuse to mass-nominate as many "other media" articles as you can find. Darkknight2149 21:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Summary style in this case would mean a summarization of each genre(?) of media. There is no need to list every video game appearance. They are not important for general knowledge on the character. What is important is that the character has appeared in numerous video games, and a proper summarization of the topic would use examples of the most prominent to describe the character's general usage in gaming. There do not appear to be any Nick Fury-based games, but something like List of Superman video games makes perfect sense to exist. "List of video games in which Superman has appeared" would be absolutely unnecessary and bloated. That list does have a small, curated subsection dedicated to that, but that's only a fraction of what would exist in a full list of every game in which the character has appeared. TTN (talk) 21:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete or merge as there are insufficient sources to support three separate topics, between the main Nick Fury article, Alternate versions of Nick Fury, and now this Nick Fury in other media. We should not create multiple non-notable WP:CONTENTFORKs that don't meet the WP:GNG as three separate topics and articles. I would also support a merge as that was the consensus at Alternate versions of Nick Fury. Jontesta (talk) 21:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Jontesta: Per WP:NEXIST, WP:ARTN, WP:ATD, and WP:HANDLE, that's not how WP:GNG or coverage works. The sourcing in the article has nothing to do with whether something is notable or deleted, which only depends on the existence of extensive coverage. Nick Fury's history of appearing in adapted media is covered extensively outside of Wikipedia. "The sources in the article are insufficient" means nothing as far as deletion goes. Darkknight2149 21:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Nick Fury per WP:ATD. BOZ (talk) 00:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This has been mentioned in lots of sources and therefore is WP:VERIFIABLE. Just needs a better article name, possibly Nick Fury outside comic books. 122.60.173.107 (talk) 07:31, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Topic fails stand-alone (GNG) requirements for an article, this is just a catalogue like list of trivia that also fails LISTN. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:11, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Piotrus: Really? By what measure does it fail either of those?
- Per WP:GNG, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list."
- Per WP:LISTN, "Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been."
- The topic passes both of those requirements rather easily. Darkknight2149 22:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Darkknight2149: I am not seeing any reliable sources that provide a comprehensive view of "Nick Fury in other media", so GNG/LISTN is failed. But if you want to draw my attention to some sources, please ping me here with links, I am never above revising my view&vote. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge with the main page, but send the information of the Ultimate Marvel's version to it's page if the outcome is merge. As for the amalgamated versions, share it on both pages. --Rtkat3 (talk) 22:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Since people are still voting "merge" for some reason, I figured I should go ahead and post some of the many sources covering Nick Fury's history of appearing in other media. It certainly helps that most (nearly all) of the appearances listed are already individually sourced in the current revision of the article.
https://screenrant.com/mcu-nick-fury-actors-almost-cast-george-clooney/
https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/disney-plus-may-2020-fury-files-explained
https://ew.com/article/2008/05/09/success-iron-man/
https://www.vulture.com/2013/06/sam-jackson-would-like-to-guest-on-shield.html
https://www.cbr.com/agents-of-s-h-i-e-l-d-ep-talks-ratings-nick-fury-cameo/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2013/08/18/samuel-l-jackson-sunday-conversation/2665355/
https://www.vulture.com/2014/04/jackson-on-agents-of-shield-finale.html
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/captain-marvel-90s-kevin-feige-brie-larson-1202785738/
https://ew.com/movies/2018/03/09/marvel-studios-kevin-feige-mcu-future/
https://ew.com/movies/2018/09/07/captain-marvel-samuel-l-jackson-young-nick-fury/
https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456051/captain-marvel-what-we-know-so-far-about-nick-furys-past
https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/nick-fury-series-samuel-l-jackson-disney-plus-1234782313/
https://www.cbr.com/samuel-l-jackson-first-regular-tv-role-nick-fury-fitting/
https://www.tvguide.com/news/david-hasselhoff-samuel-jackson-diss-nick-fury-1069954/
http://www.mtv.com/news/2603103/david-hasselhoff-nick-fury/
https://geektyrant.com/news/2013/9/9/david-hasselhoff-stan-lee-called-me-the-ultimate-nick-fury
https://gamerant.com/marvels-avengers-gameplay-leak-nick-fury/
https://www.businessinsider.com/samuel-l-jackson-thanks-mark-millar-2015-4
https://screenrant.com/nick-fury-comics-movies/
https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/wire-buzz-fury-files-covenant-funimationcon
https://www.ign.com/articles/2017/01/13/between-the-panels-marvel-comics-has-a-nick-fury-problem
https://www.comingsoon.net/tv/news/1133754-fury-files-disney-sets-new-marvel-series-for-may
https://ew.com/article/2012/03/02/ultimate-spider-man-nick-fury/
https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a32409692/disney-plus-marvel-nick-fury-files/
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/ultimate-spider-man-recruits-nick-643461
https://bgr.com/2020/05/05/marvel-disney-plus-new-releases-fury-files-future-avengers/
https://web.archive.org/web/20181011091409/http://www.highlanderworldwide.com/2017/02/11/jim-byrnes/
- I stand by my earlier statement that this feels like an attempt to start a "Nominate all In other media articles for deletion" bandwagon. A merge would only result in nearly all of the appearances listed in Nick Fury in other media being re-added to Nick Fury in paragraph form. No merge is even necessary, because this topic easily passes WP:LISTN. Darkknight2149 07:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- I’m truly confused at what you think you’re posting. Nobody disputes that the character has appeared in a multitude of media, but how does that show this page needs to exist? You posted many that are attributed to characters that already have their own pages as well. That also doesn’t change that there is no need to list most of the content in the article. It is simply trivial information that can easily be summarized in the main article. TTN (talk) 12:04, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- Just to give a couple examples, Goku#In other media and Naruto Uzumaki#In other media are the quickest I can find that sufficiently wrap up long history in a number of dedicated paragraphs. There's plenty of media not listed there because it doesn't matter. We're a not a comprehensive guide to each franchise. This is a general encyclopedia. Just because the comics-space has ingrained content-bloat into its style does not mean that it's actually the proper way of organizing information. I get it's a bit different due to way more unconnected adaptations, but anything that is not important to a summary paragraph is too unimportant to be in the article. TTN (talk) 12:17, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedic guide to anything that has coverage by reliable sources and is notable. That can sometimes include fictional elements. We have a forey of reliable sources that heavily discuss (and are devoted primarily to) Nick Fury's appearances outside of the comics, especially (but not limited to) film and television. The current version of Nick Fury in other media is also pretty economical and avoids going into unnecessary detail, and most of the individual appearances listed are already verified by some sort of citation anyway. I'm just struggling to see a policy reason to merge. Darkknight2149 21:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- But you haven't given any sources discussing the concept of the character outside of the comics. You've given sources of adaptations outside of the comics. Those are two different things. For this list to to stand on its own, you'd need actual discussion based on the concept of the character outside of comics. Most of the sources aren't even discussing anything. It's just typical press release stuff, which is only suitable for verification purposes. This is still just a content fork of the main article, so we have to look at it from the idea of this being placed in the main article. It would be trimmed down to the essentials in that case, as with pretty much every major non-comic character I can find. TTN (talk) 01:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedic guide to anything that has coverage by reliable sources and is notable. That can sometimes include fictional elements. We have a forey of reliable sources that heavily discuss (and are devoted primarily to) Nick Fury's appearances outside of the comics, especially (but not limited to) film and television. The current version of Nick Fury in other media is also pretty economical and avoids going into unnecessary detail, and most of the individual appearances listed are already verified by some sort of citation anyway. I'm just struggling to see a policy reason to merge. Darkknight2149 21:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Heart (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Heart (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Unnecessary deletion nomination because splits are addressed by merger, not deletion. See WP:IGNORINGATD. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:30, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with above, stuff like this should be taken care of with merges, not AFDs.★Trekker (talk) 19:14, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- @*Treker and Andrew Davidson: Given the extensive coverage of the topic, the fact that the current article doesn't go into excessive detail, and the fact that nearly all of the individual appearances in the article are already sourced, what policy-based reason is there to merge? Genuine question. It clearly passes WP:LISTN and the point above about "Wikipedia isn't Wikia and I don't think this is important to cover" isn't a very good argument. Darkknight2149 19:20, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- The current title is clearly written as part of a set as the phrase "other media" only makes sense in a wider context such as a navigational template. This is not ideal IMO as sources for the topic have clearer titles such as The Encyclopedia of Superheroes on Film and Televison. But such sources demonstrate that such framing is both notable and encyclopedic. The rest is then a matter of ordinary editing, not deletion and so, for purposes of this discussion, we just keep the existing page for further work per WP:ATD. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- @*Treker and Andrew Davidson: Given the extensive coverage of the topic, the fact that the current article doesn't go into excessive detail, and the fact that nearly all of the individual appearances in the article are already sourced, what policy-based reason is there to merge? Genuine question. It clearly passes WP:LISTN and the point above about "Wikipedia isn't Wikia and I don't think this is important to cover" isn't a very good argument. Darkknight2149 19:20, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Nick Fury per WP:ATD. The topics are the same but we should strive to WP:PRESERVE information and the edit history. Archrogue (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep if the article is considered to be a list article of characters and restructured per WP:LISTN. If consensus is that none of the alternate versions are considered notable for inclusion in a split from the main article, per WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD merge them back into the main Nick Fury article. Haleth (talk) 08:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Merge as mentioned by the last few commenters. There's a WP:CONTENTFORK issue. Which ties into whether the secondary sources really distinguish this from the main topic for a second separate notable topic that isn't just WP:PLOT info. But we should make an effort to bridge the gap with people who care about the WP:ATD/WP:PRESERVE argument. Strive for WP:CONSENSUS and make Wikipedia less of a WP:BATTLEGROUND. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- It's already been established that the sources distinguish this from the main topic. There are many sources that are only devoted to Fury's appearances in other media. The closer should take note that nobody has given a strong argument for a merger, per WP:NOTAVOTE. Darkknight2149 06:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Appears well-referenced and supported. Since it also seems somewhat of a hybrid of a well-annotated list, it is really well wiki-linked, leading me to be able to read other related articles on the encyclopedia.--Concertmusic (talk) 14:03, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.