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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:27, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Master Legend

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does seem to meet guidelines for notability. The2crowrox (talk) 03:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The only verifiable source points to Masters Legend website and can't find any other source. scope_creep (talk) 20:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While I don't believe we have a notability policy for super heroes, notability is nonetheless verified through WP:BASIC as the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Subject has received significant media coverage, which includes a nine-page article in Rolling Stone Magazine and an article in LA Weekly. These sources are properly cited in the article. He was also featured in an interview with BBC Radio 1. Cindamuse (talk) 02:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

delete cant have anyone who does something a good samartian would. a couple of mentions of a 1-time action certainly doesnt warrant any lasting notability. Furthermore the article doesnt seem to be about him, but just mentions him as (At most) a strong focus(Lihaas (talk) 04:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC));[reply]

Delete per lack of substantial coverage in reliable sources, certainly not nearly enough to meet WP:BLP. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:39, 29 August 2010 (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.