Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Injustice League (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to List of Justice League enemies. There's consensus to not have an article on this. There's no consensus between merge and delete, so I'm redirecting to allow editors to decide whether and what to merge. There's also no consensus as to the merge target, so I'm picking List of Justice League enemies for now because the topic is already mentioned there. The final redirect/merge target is up to editors. But I'm protecting the redirect because of the repeated recreation.  Sandstein  07:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Injustice League
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Even though it was just deleted through AfD, an editor insists it go through again, removing the appropriate speedy G4 tag.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete The same issues that resulted in deletion a few months ago exist in this iteration of the article. There is no substantive change in sources, notability, verifiability, etc.  Pais  a re pa  01:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. SoyokoAnis  01:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per my rationale in few months ago, nothing has changed. Then salt to prevent recreation. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:02, 4 March 2021 (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  03:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - Let this page stay. There are some good sources on the page added by unlike the previous version. I wasn't there for the previous AFD, so I am making my claims here. If the page is deleted, I suggest that it be merged with List of criminal organizations in DC Comics in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 03:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The page was just deleted by an AfD. You can't really do that. SoyokoAnis  13:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A recent precedent suggested otherwise. Haleth (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - The article was already deleted by consensus in an AFD just five months ago, and nothing has changed since then. There is still no substantial coverage in reliable, secondary sources that provides anything but plot summaries. Rorshacma (talk) 03:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Selective Merge to Justice League per WP:ATD and WP:Preserve as a compromise, oppose proposed salting of the topic. Since its concept is to serve as a direct and literal villainous mirror of the Justice League, and I note as well that issues featuring the Injustice League as protagonists is listed under the topic's publication history in its article, it makes sense for me to have a summary-style paragraph in Justice League explaining what the Injustice League is. Haleth (talk) 04:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to List of Justice League enemies. Daranios (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC) Or keep as a list. - See discussion below. Daranios (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2021 (UTC) I did not see enough enough coverage for a full article in a quick search. I am happy to change my opinion if appropriate sources can be shown. As Rorshacma found in the last discussion, there are many mentions and plot-summaries in secondary sources. The concept seems to have made an impact so that it's mentioned in very independent contexts like this secondary source. So it should be treated in some form in Wikipedia rather than deleted and salted. As Haleth has said, there are secondary sources to WP:Preserve, which can improve that target. Daranios (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is like DC's notorious reboots – continuity can change and so nothing is ever settled and nobody ever dies permanently. The previous discussion clearly got this wrong as it was poorly attended and poorly informed.  The subject team appears in numerous reference books such as the DC Comics Encyclopedia; The American Villain: Encyclopedia of Bad Guys in Comics; The Supervillain Field Manual; &c.  And there's plenty of coverage elsewhere such as The Injustice League: The Team's 5 Best & 5 Worst Line-Ups; The Top 10 Most Vile Members Of The Injustice League and Why An Injustice League Movie Would Be Good ....  So, there's plenty of WP:SIGCOV, the WP:GNG is satisfied and the usual policies apply: WP:ATD, WP:NOTPAPER, WP:PRESERVE, &c. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , The listicles at CBR and fellow clickbait sites which might as well be written by a bot are quite far from what SIGCOV requires... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A big part of the topic is listing the particular supervillains in the various incarnations of the team and so listicles are perfect for this, demonstrating that the topic passes WP:LISTN. My !vote stands. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A bot that evaluates the overall quality of comic characters across different media and decades? I think that's an over- (or under-?)statement. Academic aspirations aside, I am wondering if there's doubt as to the reliability of CBR ("the premiere comics-related site on the Web") and the others. I've seen lists of reliable and unreliable sources, but I can't remember where to find them. If they were not considered unreliable, I'd also say with these articles the topic fulfills WP:GNG. What I am not sure about one way or the other is if there is enough non-plot information there.
 * Here I find Andrew's reference to WP:LISTN interesting. Seeing that many of the characters featured in the Injustice League have articles or at least article sections, this seems to me to fulfill the criteria for a stand-alone list. And lists, to my knowledge, are not necessarily concerned with WP:ALLPLOT. Daranios (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * CBR was generally reliable until it was sold in 2016. Since then, it has seen a drastic drop in quality in favor of clickbait. There are still some decent reviewers and Brian Cronin's stuff is excellent, but most of the other content is thoughtless and not an indication of notability. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is still no established, formal consensus which determines that CBR is no longer reliable. A recent RfC discussion for Screen Rant, which is under the same ownership and seems to be operating in a similar manner as CBR, does not result in any solid consensus about Screen Rant being unreliable, other then an observation that it is probably not advisable for BLP articles due to the same concerns of dip in quality and clickbaity presentation you have raised. I can't see CBR being judged differently if it is up for a RfC now. Haleth (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Was that discussion about ScreenRant being used as the primary evidence of notability for the subject, or for details about the subject? Argento Surfer (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe it was an attempt to ascertain whether there is broad consensus for its reliability as a source, which would also affect its suitability as evidence of notability for topics on Wikipedia. The closer determined that it is marginally reliable, in other words a situational source, in that it is fine for entertainment or fictional topics but likely not appropriate for BLP articles, which is not applicable here since this topic isn't a BLP which would demand higher standards of sourcing quality. Haleth (talk) 09:21, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to an appropriate target per ATD and PRESERVE. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 22:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Recently axed article reinstated without discussion.  Dark knight  2149  06:58, 9 March 2021 (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.