Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cosmic Ghost Rider

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.  JGHowes  talk 02:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmic Ghost Rider (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Comic book figure. No third-party sources cited (WP:N). Mostly plot summary (WP:NOTPLOT). Previously covered as part of an article deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of the Punisher for the same reasons. Sandstein 21:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 21:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 21:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or redirect to Punisher - The topic lacks real world information from reliable sources, so any discussion of it belongs in the main article. Another option might be to create an article on the comic book series named Thanos should that have any coverage in reliable sources and merge it there. TTN (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reframing/creating a new article based on the later comic is a fine alternative as well, but I would avoid the conflation of the comic and the character like a lot of these articles seem to do for whatever reason. They are not the same thing even if obviously tied together. TTN (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/03/02/how-punisher-became-the-cosmic-ghost-rider

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/heat-vision/cosmic-ghost-rider-comic-book-series-coming-marvel-1099831

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/03/06/comedian-paul-scheers-comic-book-writing-continues-with-cosmic-ghost-rider-destroys-marvel-history/

https://screenrant.com/revenge-cosmic-ghost-rider-punisher-comic/

https://www.cbr.com/marvel-comics-cosmic-ghost-rider-facts-trivia/

https://io9.gizmodo.com/thanos-cosmic-ghost-rider-is-actually-someone-you-know-1822461637

https://www.avclub.com/thanos-the-punisher-gives-cosmic-ghost-rider-a-choice-i-1830335533

https://www.polygon.com/comics/2018/7/6/17542060/cosmic-ghost-rider-marvel-comics-baby-thanos-donny-cates

https://comicbook.com/marvel/news/cosmic-ghost-rider-origin-jim-valentino-donny-cates/

https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/marvels-next-big-hit-cosmic-ghost-rider-gets-his-own-summer-mini-series

https://comicbookroundup.com/comic-books/reviews/marvel-comics/cosmic-ghost-rider/1

The character and its namesake publications are not only discussed heavily and critically evaluated from a real world perspective by multiple reliable news publications, but its popularity as a "breakout character" is heavily discussed as well. As just one example, there is even a paragraph that explains:

It's this appearance that's been the subject to some controversy over the better part of the past two years. You see, superstar Marvel writer Donny Cates introduced a character called Cosmic Ghost Rider in the pages of Thanos #13, an issue that quickly became a hot item among collectors and speculators alike. As fate would have it, comics fans soon argued amongst themselves on whether Cates' Thanos was the first true appearance of the character or if it was that issue from Valentino's Guardians of the Galaxy over 20 years ago.

Real world aspects of the character, his acclaim, and publication history are intricately discussed. Sandstein citing "comic book figure" as a reason for deletion is also silly, considering that comic books are a topic covered on Wikipedia (like it or not). NOTPLOT is not a criteria for deletion either. Ultimately, the "It's just fancruft" / "It's just not notable" stock rationales above are insufficient. The coverage speaks for itself. Darkknight2149 03:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - More than one publication has been named after the character, which means reliable (niche) sources are available to provide real-world information like sales numbers and critical commentary, along with interviews with the creators about the development of the character. See Comic Book Round Up (the Rotten Tomatoes of comic books) to start. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep based on sources above, specifically the ones from news sites discussing publications featuring the character. In fact, the article could be restructured to emphasize the publication. Rhino131 (talk) 15:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and improve. The additional sources being brought up in this discussion adequately demonstrates notability. Haleth (talk) 10:53, 15 November 2020 (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.