Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Comics and animation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Comics and animation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Comics and animation. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...

Scan for comics AfDs

Scan for animation AfDs
Scan for webcomics AfDs
Scan for comics Prods
Scan for animation Prods
Scan for webcomics Prods
Scan for comics template TfDs
Scan for animated series template TfDs

Related deletion sorting

Comics and animation

Kris Millsap

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

Fails WP:GNG. A behind-the-scenes film production worker doesn't get a lot of media notice. He's no exception. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Television, Comics and animation, Kansas, Missouri, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. As I've already told the user before, both in their talk page and in another AfD, they must remember that this is a BLP, so the standards for sourcing are much more strict than the article observes, also. Coeusin (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beach Head (G.I. Joe)

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG entirely. Mostly plot article of a non-notable cartoon character. (The previous nomination was closed as procedural keep due to the nom's disruption, but the merits were not discussed at all). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Toys. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters. As in actually merge rather than just redirect so there's not less about the character than there is than Colonel Courage, as there's clearly some very minor notability, if not enough to justify a standalone
- https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Ultimate_Guide_to_G_I_Joe_1982_1994/_BNjDwAAQBAJ? and https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fPYYEQAAQBAJ don't have much in-depth of the guy but would probably make acceptable citations of the basic facts in a list article.
- https://thehardtimes.net/lists/every-g-i-joe-ranked-by-how-well-they-could-teach-a-sex-ed-class/ and https://thehardtimes.net/lists/50-g-i-joe-characters-ranked-by-how-effectively-they-could-have-stopped-9-11/ are a bit useless, even on the zany listicle scale. LOL, he has BO, it was mentioned on his filecard and never again.
- https://lylesmoviefiles.com/2013/03/25/g-i-joe-the-movie-review-an-80s-classic-revisited/ again provides a source for citation of his role in the movie, but not in depth to justify a standalone
- While some of the capsules at https://screenrant.com/gi-joe-3-characters-villains-discussion/ could probably help stub a Reception section, Beach Head's isn't one of them.
As an overall point, this one can function nicely as a test case.

I'm not actually sure any of the G. I. Joe characters flood-nominated recently warrant deletion, most of them just need to be merged to the appropriate character list articles, as the vast majority have *some* notability, even if it's far from what's needed for GNG. As merging after an AfD involves simply redirecting because closing admins are busy people, I would suggest the sub-par Joe articles would be better sorted through proactive use of editing and merge/redirect templates, which would be a less time-consuming method for everyone involved, and probably wouldn't take any more time than decent BEFORE and researching AfD votes. Otherwise there's the risk we end up in one of those moronic loops where the list directs people to the main article, which directs people back to the list, which is a lot more irritating to 99% of readers of Wikipedia than an article being on the crufty side. Personally don't see the need to have a ticking clock on that being done after 19 years or whatever of the article being there. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 09:20, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 delete‎. ^Complex/_Rational 22:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Krzak

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

Fails WP:GNG zero independent reliable sources and conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom Laura240406 (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I searched EBSCO database and Google News; and found only passing mentions confirming his animation credits, but lacking SIGCOV. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 19:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The few sources are only mentions, social media or primary sources. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - from what I can tell, an up and coming but not yet notable animator. Bearian (talk) 01:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no reliable coverage in independent media, apart from original research and possible not true facts in BLP page. Norlk (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Reads like an instagram page of self promotion. Nothing particularly notable and sourcing is poor. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:21, 19 May 2025 (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.

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 delete‎. – robertsky (talk) 14:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elsie Lovelock

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

Fails WP:GNG with no independent sources that I can find. The only significant role of this voice actress is in SMG4, a web series. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Should be able to find plenty of sources Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now would be the time to do so, if you wish to see the article be kept. It's not enough to just baselessly state that "sources must exist" somewhere out there. Sergecross73 msg me 10:49, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you fancy that many sources please list them here. Do remember iMDb is NOT a source. MimirIsSmart (talk) 04:01, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I could not locate enough reliable sources to establish notability. The only other source I found was a brief quote in an IGN article about AI. Esw01407 (talk) 12:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Theatre, Video games, Comics and animation, Anime and manga, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Totally unreferenced stub with list of unreferenced WP:MILL credits. Nothing would be lost by deleting this. If anyone ever finds any significant coverage of this person, they will be able to write a much better article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources are used to prove a subject's notability for Wikipedia, and this article includes none and is entirely original research. If secondary/tertiary sources can be found than this article can or should be rewritten from the ground up to use them properly. But for now, it's not a good idea to have this current revision in the mainspace. SleepyRedHair (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As much as I would like to see more articles about English voice actors in anime, I just can't see how this person is notable. Link20XX (talk) 00:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All this does is takes the article out of Public viewership and frees no disc space whatsoever. These deletions are totally unnecessary Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the point. It goes against Wikipedia's Manual of Style and guidelines on notability to have articles be written like this. SleepyRedHair (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a valid reason to keep an article. Please focus on proving notability. Sergecross73 msg me 14:40, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article was a redirect due to insufficient sources until recently, when Madball12345 (talk · contribs) inexplicably re-added the same content without references. Xexerss (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lack of notability and is mostly original research. MimirIsSmart (talk) 04:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say Delete to, and also Xexerss i apologize for readding the context without references.

Before that it was one clear page with nothing on it and so i would say Delete. Madball12345 (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2025 (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.

Elise Allen

AfDs for this article:

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

Not convinced this person is notable. Yes she wrote a "New York Times bestseller", but even for that the primary reason it was a bestseller was because she coauthored it with Hilary Duff, and it seems likely many people bought it because they were fans of Duff – essentially ghostwriting in the open. She created some children's TV shows – even if those shows are notable, I don't think that necessarily makes her notable by extension. Note this article was already deleted per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Elise_Allen in Feb 2020 but then recreated roughly 10 months later – and I'm not sure if anything had really changed between its deletion and its recreation. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I suppose the Emmy nomination could be notable, but all we have for sourcing is a list with a name. I can't find sourcing about this person, so not enough for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 01:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Comics and animation, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Commenting as this is reaching the end of a week of AfD - I have so far found coverage of her and another book she wrote, The Traveling Marathoner (Fodor, 2006). That could certainly be added to the article. I'll see what else I can find. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added reviews of her books - not just those she co-authored, but there are multiple reviews for Populazzi (which has a WP article) and Twinchantment (which doesn't yet, but should). It looks like her book The Traveling Marathoner also had multiple reviews - I have added one, one in the Chicago Tribune is paywalled [1], and the Los Angeles Times says [2] that "For summer reading, Runner’s World recommended “The Traveling Marathoner: A Complete Guide to Top U.S. Races and Sightseeing on the Run.” So she meets WP:AUTHOR, even without considering her significant contributions (as developer, producer, co-creator, writer) to Princess Power, Rainbow High, Gabby Duran and the Unsittables, Rainbow Rangers, and multiple Barbie movies. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which aspect of WP:AUTHOR do you think is fulfilled? - UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 3: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Plenty of coverage on the things she wrote, but there isn't significant coverage of the subject in reliable independent sources. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per RebeccaGreen. Meets NAUTHOR3 and 4(c). Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with RebeccaGreen and others that the article passes notability via WP:NAUTHOR #3 with multiple reviews in independent reliable secondary sources for the subject's books. Nnev66 (talk) 16:52, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion