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 keep. any editorial merge and redirect discussion can continue on the talkpage. (non-admin closure) Off2riorob (talk) 11:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Massachusetts Academy (comics) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Article was prodded due to lack of 3rd party references. I thought it better dealt with at AfD. Artw (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Please see WP:BEFORE. It recommends improvement before deletion. ----moreno oso (talk) 21:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. —--moreno oso (talk) 21:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the concern is that there are no third-party references (and thus significant coverage in independent sources) available. Any non-cruft content can be merged with another X-men article. Claritas § 08:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that "delete but merge the content" is not available as an option due to our licensing. Jclemens (talk) 15:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I mean "merge and redirect" . I don't see anything which isn't fancruft, so straight deletion is probably the best option. Claritas § 16:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per Articles that don't meet the inclusion criteria. This is a well developed article whose topic has appeared for 29 years in the Uncanny X-Men fictional world. A compendium on either X-Men or Marvel Comics can supply the reliable sources needed for this article. Then, the subject gets ghits which means that the more reliable and verifiable URLs should be added as secondary sources or citations. While notability is not transferred, Marvel Comics and X-Men are notable. Wikipedia:NBOOKS#Criteria applies as X-Men have appeared in book form which is a subcat of this AfD. Therefore, by knowing that Marvel Comics and X-Men are notable, deriative works or terms that merit an article that would not fit into the main article because it is a large topic, are also presumed to be notable by NBooks Criteria #1, #3 and #5. ----moreno oso (talk) 12:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:

• Fictional notability does not meet real notability.
• Non-independent sources cannot be used to substantiate notability - see WP:N
• The fact that we can't fit all the information into the main X-men article suggests that there's way too much trivial plot summary here of no encylopaedic value at all.
• Also, you might like to read that any argument based on Ghits is generally frowned upon

You're mistaken. Claritas § 16:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per moreno oso. BOZ (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep PROD'er recommends a merge, so there are no current editors arguing for deletion. Minor but longstanding element of a large notable fictional universe. No opposition to editorial merge, but this AfD is not necessary at this point. Jclemens (talk) 15:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The user who put the prod on this article also put the prod on another comic book article on Liz Allan to which just removed becaused the article does meet the notability requirements. He was nominating it for deletion for the same reason on this article. I did explain he could explain himself on a certain talk page but he hasn't responded so I feel like he is just randomly putting prods on certain articles. As for this article itself I do agree with moreno oso. Jhenderson777 (talk) 16:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.