Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mac Gargan (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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Mac Gargan
AfDs for this article:


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

Almost all of the sources he is mentioned in are top 10 lists by content farms that don't go into detail, and the others are just "oh yeah he's in this along with some other characters". Industrial Insect (talk) 12:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy,  and Comics and animation. Industrial Insect (talk) 12:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I would like to add that the previous discussion's consensus on keep was a bunch of users claiming that "scorpion isn't a minor comic book character dude.", and "I like it". Additionally, I like what user Higher Further Faster said; "In my opinion, if this page gets deleted, many pages should be deleted as well" I'm working on that right this second. Industrial Insect (talk) 12:14, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * And you need to chill out on that because the volume of AfDs make it hard for anyone to research Keep votes and could be counterproductive. While I don't disagree on many of the noms going for articles on the grounds of some sort of "if you say so" to a comment in a past AfD is not a good look either. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 13:47, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I would like to apologize for that greatly. I got sorta delete happy upon noticing how many comic-related articles do not have any RS, so I figured this would be a big, productive way to contribute to the encyclopedia. And, if I understood that last bit correctly, I would like to clarify that, no, I did not start nominating articles for deletion because of that comment. It was more of an unnecessary snarky remark, as I had wanted to do this for weeks now, and I finally just started. Again, I would like to apologize. Industrial Insect (talk) 13:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No harm done, though snark isn't something I'd recommend in AfDs and nor is calling out an editor not in the discussion, as either could lead to misinterpretation about your motives =) Regarding the volume of nominations, I happen to be in full agreement that a number of Marvel pages don't warrant standalone pages and should be edited and merged into the character lists. However you must bear in mind that not all notable sources are on Google, particularly for niche examples, and to give people interested in doing so chance to check other resources. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 14:37, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per the claims of the last discussion that were made by, , , , and . Let's here what they have to say about this second nomination of this character. Also, is right about what he said to the nominator. --Rtkat3 (talk) 19:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The nominator should rethink their mass nominations of comics articles.★Trekker (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep and Close The previous nomination was among the numerous low quality mass-nominations of character articles carried out by TTN, Piotrus, and others between 2020-2022. There was a consensus that the article passed WP:GNG in the previous nomination and it hasn't been a year since then.  Dark knight  2149  19:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep based on sources found by ★Trekker in the last AFD - do you see anything for the more than a dozen other articles they nominated? BOZ (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Fine. I'll tag @Piotrus too, since he was the nom in the og discussion. None of the sources you found in the last AfD discuss him in detail. Additionally, no good arguments were made in the previous discussion, except for "he's not a niche character". Have you guys noticed we aren't fandom? Something's existence does not warrant it's inclusion here. Industrial Insect (talk) 12:41, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect per my previous comments, including analysis of the sources found which I concluded fail SIGCOV. I see no reason to change my mind, but I am happy to provide feedback on any particular source if anyone makes an argument it contains SIGCOV (an argument, not an assertion). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep based on what fellow editors have said and on the recent edits made on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higher Further Faster (talk • contribs)


 * 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.