Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Injustice League


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Injustice League

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar." It was sadly deprodded by an anon with no rationale, so here we go... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

*Keep, major notable element in DC comics, plenty covered. IQNQ (talk) 08:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC) Indef blocked user followed a SPI
 * Delete - No reliable sources presenting significant coverage and all plot information. TTN (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ping User:Sandstein&User:RoySmith: can anyone strike out votes of blocked editors? IQNQ above just got indeffed followed an SPI but their votes are not struck. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , Feel free to strike, citing the SPI. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - The current article is comprised entirely of primary sourced plot summaries, and should not be kept as is. Searching for additional sources turns up surprisingly little - there are plenty of plot summaries that mention them, but no actual in-depth coverage or analysis that would allow this to pass the WP:GNG.  If someone can suggest a reasonable Redirect target, I'd be amenable to that, but I have not found anything appropriate myself.  Rorshacma (talk) 15:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as entirely primary sourced with only WP:PLOT details, which is something wikipedia articles are WP:NOT. There are no secondary sources to remedy the fundamental incompatibilities with our policies and guidelines. I'm sure the concept comes up in passing in one of the plots of the fiction, and I would not object to a redirect if a suitable target is found. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:55, 13 October 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.