Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of metafictional Amalgam imprints


 * 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 and redirect to Amalgam Comics. --- Deville (Talk) 02:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

List of metafictional Amalgam imprints
This isn't needed at all. It's fancruft. All the comics mentioned never existed. Fictional comics mentioned in Amalgam comics aren't very useful. RobJ1981 00:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, then write a comic about it. - CheNuevara 01:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Merge, then write a letter about the comic you didn't write about it. I wouldn't mind if the list were merged, sans details, to Amalgam Comics. "They invented a number of fictional past storylines such as... " etc. -HKMarks 22:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 03:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is not useful information. It's not even an interesting story.Doczilla 07:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Storkk 14:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge to Amalgam Comics. I think the others who have spoken up are mistaken in saying this is not material of interest; it is part of the story being told.  Modern comics fans are apt to be interested not just in the stories inside the comics but by the history of comics; this is part of the story the Amalgam producers are telling for those readers.  I think it's missing the point to say "these comics never existed" and think that automatically translates to "the fact that these comics have been established as part of the decades-long (fictional) history of Amalgam Comics means nothing." -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Note: it does need a cleanup on one very important issue, though:  it keeps using the word "imprints" when the correct word would be either "title" or "issue". -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:17, 22 September 2006 (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.