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. Shereth 17:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional history of Wolverine[edit]

Fictional history of Wolverine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Nominated per WP:NOT. Basically an overly long mostly in-universe plot summary of numerous story arcs centering around Wolverine with no real world context. Jonny2x4 (talk) 04:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom Leonard^(Bloom) 04:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as this is actually what people looking up Wolverine would probably be in part looking up. 70.55.86.157 (talk) 04:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete 48 KB of plot. A great number of things will happen to any comic book character. Good articles about comic book characters should not recount everything, but cover the important stuff in 200-300 words (see for example Batman). This was moved out of Wolverine because it was overwhelming the rest of the article, so do not merge this back, just delete it. I'm sure that a link to one of the many sites that recount the plot of comic books can be inserted for readers interested in a plot summary. --Phirazo 04:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/merge 200-300 words won't do for a character like Wolverine. There will be masses of secondary comment on these many and various storylines in reviews and such, so the article has much potential. At worst, one would merge back into the main article but I suppose that is already a good length. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Batman has been in comics twice as long as Wolverine, and yet Wolverine's character summary is three times longer and its own article. This is far too long, and is pure plot summary. --Phirazo 02:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Biographical history of one of the most notable characters in modern fiction. As with other, similar articles, this history cannot feasibly be fit into the main article. And I'm a little puzzled by suggestions to "send people elsewhere" for the information. The article could also use some tidying, but that is in no way a rationale for deletion. Ford MF (talk) 12:55, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • We shouldn't be writing "biographies" of fictional characters. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). --Phirazo 02:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. —Ford MF (talk) 12:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Out of the 40 cited references in the article, only two are real world commentary on the stories. The rest is just the in-universe "fictional biography" of Wolverine. Jonny2x4 (talk) 13:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While not as notable as Spiderman or Wonder Woman, this character too has had at least one non-fiction book written about him (mainly centered on his "fictional history" I suspect). Clearly meets WP:N, and (if anyone cares) WP:FICT. Hobit (talk) 17:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep None of the reasons given for deletion are adequate ones. While it is safe to say that many comic characters have elaborate fictional histories, enduring characters like Wolverine deserve their separate entries. Trying to cram the hundreds of adventures and characters into the main article would be, at best, cumbersome. Entry deletions are best left for erroneous or false entries, not simply because someone feels it's overwrought. Badass-boi (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a retelling of the plot of several comic books, twisted together into a single narrative. It clearly violates WP:NOT#PLOT. --Phirazo 02:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but revise: Wolverine has been shown to be notable, popular and important to the Marvel Universe, and is - thanks in large part to Hugh Jackman - also now quite widely known. A "biographical" summary is therefore acceptable and noteworthy. As noted, this is likely to form a large part of what users will be looking for. As also noted, it tends to skirt - or flout - the guidelines on plot summation and in-universe style. However there is precendence for lengthy character summaries - see Padmé Amidala for a Wikipedia-highlighted good example. Moreover, a key phrase from the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) is the word "rarely" in the following passage:

"Very rarely should such spinout articles be about a singular topic; either that topic has demonstrated its own notability, or should be merged into the main article or existing spinout articles."

• • "Rarely" is sometimes, and in this case - when a "topic has demonstrated its own notability." As Wolverine has.
  • That there is a shorter summary for Batman is neither here nor there. Batman has multiple pages dealing with several comics, two film series', a TV series and several cartoons. That there isn't a page like this for the character implies that there ought to be, not that this should disappear.
  • Wikipedia:Plot summaries simply suggests that it be rewritten to include real world terms:

“

Plot summaries can be written from the real world perspective by referring to specific works or parts of works ("In the first book", "In Act II") or describing things from the author or creator's perspective ("The author introduces", "The story describes"). This gives the summary a more grounded tone and makes it more accessible to those unfamiliar with the source material. This style of writing should be preferred for plot summaries that encompass multiple works, such as a series of novels.

”

• • However, the suggestion of a link to an outside plot-summary source is an interesting and potentially valid alternative. ntnon (talk) 03:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Batman is a featured article, and it covers 69 years of Batman plots in a third the space that this article does. That indicates to me that this is far too long. The essay you linked to, Wikipedia:Plot summaries, suggests plot summaries be 300-500 words. Even the plot summary for War and Peace is shorter than this. --Phirazo 16:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • On the current Batman page being a featured article, I will also point out that there are a dozen other Batman-related pages, so the "Batman" article can have an added level brevity because it not the sole article to deal with the fictional history of the character. And I say again, both Batman and Superman (in my opinion) need an article like this..! Good example - but of course War and Peace, legendarily long though it is, is still dramatically shorter than the continuing adventures of Wolverine...! W and P is (at least here) easily separable into five sections - Wolverine's story has many more sections to deal with. ntnon (talk) 19:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to his article. This history is an excuse to put every known "fact" about Wolverine somewhere. I disagree with the premise that users will use this as a resource; it is far too long.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fee Fi Foe Fum (talk • contribs)
• Keep - As this is a WP:Split from the Wolverine comics page. This page was originally split off due to size reasons, and while clearly some trimming could make the size more managable, there is no reason to delete a this page specifically due to the iconic nature of the character. The split was tagged with no contention, and consensus formed on the talk page. -Sharp962 (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Summary style isn't a free pass. --Phirazo 18:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It can be. But in this case there exists books on the character. Those are more than enough to meet WP:N for his fictional history. Hobit (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • None of these books are cited in the article. Wolverine is notable, but that is no reason to write such a long plot summary. --Phirazo 02:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Since the current consensus favors keeping this article, keep in mind this doesn't mean that it needs to stay unchanged. It has to be rewritten to comfort with a non-in-universe perspective as perWP:WAF. Jonny2x4 (talk) 15:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does that mean you're volunteering? Ford MF (talk) 18:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. If the article isn't perfect, trim it. I'm all for that. Being said, & having said it before, I'll say it again: notable info on a notable character. The article improves the project. --mordicai. (talk) 18:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, or merge back into Wolverine (comics). BOZ (talk) 23:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge back into original article, but with massive trims. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.