Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-Man


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

V-Man

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

Very minor superhero, whose comic book series lasted two issues. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline requirement nor the more detailed Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. Cited sources confirm this is not a hoax but do not contain any analysis or in-depth discussion as required by WP:SIGCOV. A redirected and maybe a tiny merge to Fox_Feature_Syndicate might be appropriate, but keeping this as a stand-alone entry, simply summarizing the publication history and his (rather short) fictional biography, is rather WP:FANCRUFTy. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:51, 2 June 2022 (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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  16:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * comment FWIW Fox_Feature_Syndicate already contains a link to this article and it's not in a format where merging anything there would make sense. Articles links are not in great shape - deleted one and replaced one with a wayback link. Of the sources that I can see theres some that work for WP:V but only the Secondary Superheroes of Golden Age Comics one seems worthwhile for WP:N - i can see it on google books and it covers a couple of pages regarding publication history etc. More than that will need to be found if this article is to be kept. Artw (talk) 22:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom as this has no WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The nom does point out a valid redirect target if someone wants to argue for it. Jontesta (talk) 18:11, 5 June 2022 (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.