Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Jean Grey


 * 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 merge to Jean Grey. Tone 08:13, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Alternative versions of Jean Grey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per the majority of the other similar AfDs on these topics, this is an unnecessary article split for the purpose of shoving off overly in-depth plot information that should have been condensed and summarized. As an offshoot, it does not establish independent notability to meet WP:GNG. Aside from a singular minor interview response that's hardly important enough to bother including anywhere, there is no real world information in the article that makes it worth merging. TTN (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to Jean Grey. BOZ (talk) 21:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Fails to provide a legitimate rationale for deletion. Per WP:DELREASON, WP:NEXIST, WP:ARTN, WP:ATD, WP:NNC, and WP:HANDLE, you need a better reason to nominate something than or . WP:GNG is determined only by the existence of sources, not by what is or isn't cited in the article itself. WP:JUSTAPOLICY, WP:RUBBISH, and WP:IMPATIENT also come to mind.  Dark  knight  2149  07:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Rationales aside, I would not be opposed to a summarized version of the topic being merged into Jean Grey if it can fit, or if it can be established that the existence of coverage is inadequate to meet WP:GNG or WP:LISTN.  Dark  knight  2149  07:19, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge as a compromise to deletion. The article lacks significant coverage in third party sources to meet the WP:GNG. You can't make articles from entirely unsourced/primary material, but some amount of it is appropriate as part of another notable topic. This narrow topic is not notable as is. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: This is a pure plot summary. I don't think there is much to merge, but I am not strongly opposed to it if someone feels like salvaging a bit here or there. On its own this of course fails NFICTION/GNG. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:03, 15 September 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.