- 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 delete. MBisanz talk 18:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Iron Man 2 (toy line)
- Iron Man 2 (toy line) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is just a list of toys without anything to establish notability for the toy line itself. TTN ( talk) 00:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 01:22, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 01:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Wow. Looking at Template:Superhero toy lines just makes one wonder how much fan-cruft like this we need to prune. This kind of stuff belongs on a toy wikia or such, but WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. I can totally see how such a list would be useful to somebody, but WP:ITSUSEFUL is not what Wikipedia is about. Again, I hope we can find a wikia somewhere where such articles could be moved. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Fluff advertising.-- YHoshua ( talk) 19:53, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Basing my comment on not paper; this is the sort of article that expands our coverage of areas better than a paper encyclopedia would. It should be thought of as appended to Marvel Toys. It's quite a tidy, informative article, certainly not subject to the excesses of some. Hiding T 15:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Is there an accepted guideline for what makes a toyline notable? I browsed Wikipedia:WikiProject Toys some, but all I found was Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games), a failed proposal that focused on specific, individual toys. Argento Surfer ( talk) 18:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:54, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:54, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as nothing coming close to suggest this can ever be an informatively substantial article by itself. SwisterTwister talk 19:34, 26 August 2016 (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.
- 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 delete. MBisanz talk 18:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Iron Man 2 (toy line)
- Iron Man 2 (toy line) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is just a list of toys without anything to establish notability for the toy line itself. TTN ( talk) 00:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 01:22, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 01:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Wow. Looking at Template:Superhero toy lines just makes one wonder how much fan-cruft like this we need to prune. This kind of stuff belongs on a toy wikia or such, but WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. I can totally see how such a list would be useful to somebody, but WP:ITSUSEFUL is not what Wikipedia is about. Again, I hope we can find a wikia somewhere where such articles could be moved. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Fluff advertising.-- YHoshua ( talk) 19:53, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Basing my comment on not paper; this is the sort of article that expands our coverage of areas better than a paper encyclopedia would. It should be thought of as appended to Marvel Toys. It's quite a tidy, informative article, certainly not subject to the excesses of some. Hiding T 15:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Is there an accepted guideline for what makes a toyline notable? I browsed Wikipedia:WikiProject Toys some, but all I found was Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games), a failed proposal that focused on specific, individual toys. Argento Surfer ( talk) 18:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:54, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:54, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as nothing coming close to suggest this can ever be an informatively substantial article by itself. SwisterTwister talk 19:34, 26 August 2016 (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.