Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asterix on postage stamps


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Asterix. Consensus to merge into Asterix#In popular culture. It can be further discussed in the talk page outside AfD if appropriate. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Asterix on postage stamps

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Lacks notability as a separate topic (and no obvious redirect target), unsourced and abandoned article. Prod was removed because "Being featured on postage stamps is a pretty huge honor for any topic, as such the topic asserts notability," but while the fact that Asterix postage stamps have been made shows the (undisputed) notability of Asterix, the indicated lack of notability is for the topic of this list, "Asterix on postage stamps" as a whole. Fram (talk) 08:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Lists. Fram (talk) 08:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment it's not difficult to verify that the stamps genuinely exist, but there's nothing much else to say about them. I have some sympathy with the de-prodder's argument that being on a national postage stamp is inherently notable. As a compromise, could we merge this into the main Asterix article? I'm not sure where; it's not really "popular culture". We need an Asterix-beyond-the-books section. Elemimele (talk) 16:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. At first glance it seems like an easy fail of guidelines for cross-intersecting - Asterix and stamps - but it's not as straightforward. Consider the section Asterix where the stamps certainly would merit inclusion, more so than several of the entries therein. Merge the verifiable bits to Asterix, if that section is even desirable? Geschichte (talk) 16:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge to Asterix or Merge with Tintin on postage stamps and rename to Fictional characters on postage stamps - Not sure I really grasp the dePROD comment. Being featured on a stamp is a clear indication of the notability of Asterix, but I don't see how this creates any notability for Asterix on postage stamps. As an example, a quick search found that Louis Braille has been commemorated on stamps by multiple countries, including France, Belarus, India and Russia. I strongly disagree however that Louis Braille on postage stamps should be created or kept on Wikipedia because of this. The article should stand on its own notability: substantial coverage in reliable sources of stamps featuring Louis Braille . I would suggest merging either to Asterix as per, or merging alongside Tintin on postage stamps into a new article about fictional characters on postage stamps, however I don't know if such a topic is sufficiently notable. Shazback (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge to Asterix - While a subject being featured on a national postage stamp likely demonstrates that the subject itself is notable, that does not mean that the topic of "Subject on Postage Stamps" is, by itself, a notable topic on it its own. As mentioned above, its easy to verify that these stamps were issued, but not significant coverage discussing the phenomenon of Asterix being featured on postage stamps as its own subject, where a separate article would make sense. Rorshacma (talk) 16:15, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge to Asterix without prejudice to retargeting to a different section if appropriate. It makes sense to cover these issues as a subtopic of Asterix not as a stand alone article.  Eluchil404 (talk) 02:40, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge to Asterix per others. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2024 (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.