Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battleworld


 * 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. --  tariq abjotu  22:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Battleworld

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Not even a stub, and all information covered in the Secret Wars article. Hence superfluous.

Vote: Delete

Asgardian (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge, and/or redirect to Secret Wars - no need for a separate article. BOZ (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per FMF below, or Merge and redirect to Secret Wars. BOZ (talk) 17:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Secret Wars, merge a few sentences and then merge. Faradayplank (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no independent coverage --T-rex 16:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. This can be sourced adequately from the issues themselves.  Ford MF (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sourcing from the issues is not independent coverage. --T-rex 18:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but could use a rewrite. Notable fictional location of the Marvel U in the 1980s.  Merge isn't really a good option, as the planet persisted after Secret Wars in several other comics (which the article should more appropriately reflect, with perhaps a section on Ben Grimm on Battleworld, post-Secret Wars).  Ford MF (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Additionally, it was a major element of Beyond!, which, aside from having one character in common (the Beyonder), has nothing to do with Secret Wars at all. Ford MF (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Are there any links that show the appearances of this location? I would lean towards merging the relevant bits to the relevant sections (if it appeared in two main storylines it could be mentioned in there and the two articles linked) but if it has made too many appearances it might make sense to keep it separate. (Emperor (talk) 17:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC))
 * I'm not sure I understand the rationale of merging the info, not to one article, but all over the place. In [{The Thing]] (roughly 2/3 of his 80s solo series occurred there), Spider-Man (origin of black costume), Beyonder, Beyond!, &c.  How would this redundancy serve any of our readers?  Ford MF (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm asking this because as it stands there is no way to really assess what we should do with the article - it doesn't even have. It is worth bearing in mind that just because a fictional location gets mentioned in a number of comics it doesn't necessarily mean it needs its own section. The origin and main characteristics could be described in a section of Secret Wars and the others could link to that for the background and then include the specific pieces of plot in their own entry. As it stands I'd probably have to vote to merge it to Secret Wars and if more sources emerge we could look into splitting it off but at the moment it is even failing WP:V, withot even considering WP:FICT. (Emperor (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Regardless of the arguments at WP:FICT (which, incidentally, entirely lacks consensus), sourcing comics information to the issues in which it appears completely satisfies WP:V's proviso that "sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made." Ford MF (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem is it isn't sourced to anything - there are no footnotes saying which issues of what is being referred to there, so as it stands it is failing WP:V. However, even sourcing it to primary sources doesn't satisfy notability. You might want to keep it, I might like to keep it but in its current state I have no ammunition for arguing for even a weak keep beyond WP:ILIKEIT, which isn't good enough. As it stands I'd have to lean on this being merged into Secret Wars and see if it gets enough sources to warrant being split off again. (Emperor (talk) 13:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Have you READ Beyond? It might as well be titled Secret Wars 2. All of the stories you mentioned happened during Secret Wars, immediately after Secret Wars, or reference Secret Wars heavily. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, per FMF. Battleworld persists outside of Secret Wars, & should definately be edited to reflect that.  --mordicai. (talk) 17:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to Secret Wars. People are saying, "This is related to [foo] and related to [bar]" and that's nice, but is this article (or a proper article under this name, this one sucks) required for understanding of those articles? Absolutely not. Any reference to Battleworld is inherently a reference to Secret Wars. Battleworld was created for Secret Wars, in both an in-universe (the Beyonder created it for his test) and an out-of-universe (the setting was introduced in Secret Wars) sense. The Thing's solo series followed Secret Wars directly. Beyond! is an homage to Secret Wars. Spider-Man got his black costume in...well, I imagine you can guess. There's absolutely nothing to say about Battleworld that doesn't require a summary of Secret Wars to understand, and divorcing this from necessary context while adding nothing at all save plot summary both violates Wikipedia policy and does a disservice to readers. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as a major fictional element in a number of notable fictions. DGG (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It's just a plot summary (WP:NOT) which happens to take place in a crossover, and there is no indication that it will ever pass NOT#PLOT. Also, major WP:NOTABILITY concerns for this planet. Fiction articles are the subject of wiki policies and guidelines just like every other article, therefore delete. – sgeureka t•c 08:25, 18 June 2008 (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.