Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marvel animated universe

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel animated universe

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

As far as I am aware, there has been no official confirmation of a shared continuity between these series. In fact, it has been brought to my attention that the official Marvel handbooks list them as being in separate continuities (X-Men in Earth-92131; Iron Man in Earth-569386; Fantastic Four in Earth-534834; Spider-Man in Earth-194111; Incredible Hulk in Earth-400285; Silver Surfer in Earth-634962). Also, there are no citations throughout the article that confirm that there is a shared universe (plenty that state several crossovers, but that doesn't mean anything- there are heaps of crossovers in Marvel shows) ProfessorKilroy (talk) 02:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delte - Not sure what to do with this, but it has info that should go somewhere. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 02:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If there is something other that fansites and other wikis that use ther term and lay out what it is, I would agree. But that doesn't seem to be the case. - J Greb (talk) 03:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe redirect it to Marvel or Marvel Animation. It has a lot of references that may be useful somewhere else. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't think so. As I said below, all of the information that is referenced (mainly crossovers and special appearances, which occur in all Marvel shows, not just those from the 90s) is elsewhere in pages on wikipedia, where it makes more sense. Also, using such reference here to imply false continuity is incorrect, and all of the references lead to fan sites, meaning that the sources aren't even credible. This article should be deleted. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 05:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - If this was like DC Animated Universe, then I could understand keeping it but the opening statement even says "this is a fan term". We're not here to create articles on fan based creations unless there is some serious notability behind it and this page doesn't appear to have any notability. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 12:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It could be argued that the subject has gained notability just from being on wikipedia, allowing for readers to believe its existence... But really, as it is clearly stated as a fan term, and then provided with no citations towards official confirmation of the actual continuity (along with reliable sources saying there is no continuity), and other citations across the article sourcing fan sites, it is just original research, and should be deleted. As to content that should be kept, I believe the information on particular crossovers has potential, but is already used on each character's "In other media" section, and so is unnecessary. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:MADEUP by the fans, not citeable through reliable sources. (Also, the statement "It could be argued that the subject has gained notability just from being on wikipedia, allowing for readers to believe its existence" has so many things wrong with it I don't even know where to start). - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. But I could say, that the statement, "Also, the statement 'It could be argued that the subject has gained notability just from being on wikipedia, allowing for readers to believe its existence' has so many things wrong with it I don't even know where to start" has so many things wrong with it I don't even know where to start, but that would be a lie (making this statement as truthful as yours). I said that statement with a slightly sarcastic tone (which I'll let you off for not noticing, as there is no sarcastic font, but I did think that "... But really" following the statement would be a clue). Ultimately, the point of it was to point out that in the case of this article, wikipedia is spreading rumours, that are being believed by numerous readers. Also, a note: Wikipedia is a much nicer place if you're not so immediately harsh. It would have been more courteous to simply state that you didn't agree with the statement. I know this sounds hypocritical, but I'm just giving you an example not to follow... --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 09:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So, what happens now? This is the first article I've put through AFD, and pretty much everyone seems to agree that it should be deleted. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 09:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The premise and reason for the article to exist is that it claims a separate storyline exists out of only the film medium. No reference for this has been provided. Do not be fooled by the references which do exist, as these are character synopses which make the article into a WP:SYN. (What is the essay for this kind of dishonsety?)Curb Chain (talk) 10:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bignole's reasoning above. This article is totally completely fancruft. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 21:38, 24 October 2011 (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.