Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relationship of Clark Kent and Lois Lane (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. SarahStierch (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Relationship of Clark Kent and Lois Lane
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I nominated this article for deletion two years ago on the grounds that it was someone's essay/historiography/WP:JUSTPLOT on the relationship between Superman and Lois Lane. There does not appear to be precedent for an article of this type (I know about WP:OSE, thanks), nor do the sources support it. Yes, Clark Kent and Lois Lane are independently notable. But their relationship is not (WP:NOTINHERITED). The Article Rescue Squadron descended on the previous AFD, claiming numerous sources supporting the independent notability of the relationship itself but none appeared. In the past two years, the only additions to the article have been fair use images (and not a single edit from an ARS member, hmmm). Tagged for additional refs since 2009, it is unlikely that the notability of this topic will change in the near future. Axem Titanium (talk) 13:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete or very selectively merge into Superman. Extended plot synopsis.  Previous AFD was problematic: lots of the usual suspects had big promises that it could be improved but, two years later, it's obvious that that hasn't happened and indeed wasn't even attempted. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  17:20, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I have just added three good sources to the article and there's plenty more out there. As and when we do more, we need to get Superman into the title because this relationship is well-known in the sources as a love triangle.  What's interesting when you browse the sources, is how often the three characters are used as examples for discussion of epistomology.  Anyway, it's our fairly clear policy that articles may be imperfect; that there is no deadline for fixing unimportant topics of this sort; and that AFD is not cleanup.  Warden (talk) 17:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * keep - if their relationship is covered in detail by sources, we can have an article. Also, please actually read WP:NOTINHERITED WP:BEFORE you start quoting it because it doesn't say what you think it says. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:49, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep; If the nominator had spent a few minutes following WP:Before instead of whining about a constructive wiki project, they ought to have found the relationship is covered in detail by reliable sources, including numerous books. FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Starblind above. The three "sources" added by Colonel Warden (which I have some doubt that he's actually seen) are not tied to any specific text in the article, so their relevance to what is said in it is unclear at best. This remains essentially OR and plot summary despite the "rescue" attempt, and no one appears to be willing to undertake a meaningful rescue, even after the first AfD. No prejudice to the creation of an article (hopefully somewhat shorter) that is actually based on reliable sources. A better title might be found, as well. Deor (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per my rationale at the last AFD. The relationship is notable and is a major portion of the franchise itself, even if difficult to source.  Even with the amount of work needed, the topic meets GNG, and there is no deadline. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 22:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Lois Lane is without a doubt an important character, but her importance comes as a character in the superman universe. As such, almost all of her existence from which ehr notability is derived is related to her relationship and interactions with superman. All of this is covered well in her article. What remains to be covered here is simply plot elements, with nothing deeper, violating NOTPLOT as discussed above.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Flawed or not, I think this individual page has been picked up as an example of Wikipedia's use. The details of the relationship are covered in Forbes to Huffpost. While very confusing at points, the primary sources and secondary sources that exist just have to be brought in, even flawed this article helps readers looking for the material. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Attempt has been made to improve this article and not just adding fair use images. All Wikipedia articles are work in progress, slow or lack of progress on the article should not be a reason for deletion WP:NOEFFORT. The relationship of Clark/Superman and Lois Lane are notable, like the characters, the relationship of these two people has also become part of the popular culture, and is referenced in the media and commented and talk about by the general public. This article look specifically at the relationship of Clark/Superman and Lois Lane, a important part of the superman mythology, and how it has change and evolved in the past 75 year. Wikipedia is both a serious encyclopedia and a compendium of popular culture, the content of the this article is of interest to general Wikipedia users. This article still needs improvement and it need to be shortened, merge perhaps but not total deletion. Townboxbell 03:52, 10 June 2013 (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.