Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naruto universe

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Just a reminder, Wikipedia:Fancruft is an essay, not a policy or even a notability guideline. But I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz Read! Talk! 21:09, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto universe

Naruto universe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is Ninja World and Jutsu (Naruto) combined, both were redirected to Naruto after an AfD discussion in 2018. 1989 (talk) 15:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article "Naruto Universe" likely provides quality information about the creative process behind the Naruto, Naruto Shippuden, and Boruto series due to its in-depth exploration of the development, storytelling, characters, world-building, and the creative team's insights. It might offer details on the thematic elements, and the evolution of the franchise, making it a valuable resource for understanding the intricacies of the fictional universe. It is definitely not just a combination of other articles, as it has its own distinctiveness, and lots of different references in French, English and Japanese. All of this should be definitely considered. Carlos Eduardo Wester Pérez (talk) 16:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Carlos Eduardo Wester Pérez: Why can't this just be summed up in Naruto#Development? Also, do we really need to go into the origins of Chakra, and Jutsu when we already have articles on the subjects? Just say the series was inspired by them without going into extensive detail. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep per
WP:WAX as no actual deletion argument for this article in particular has been presented. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:33, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Tintor2 made
WP:FANCRUFT. That and the previous AfDs I linked above is what made me bring it here. 1989 (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Thank you for providing a rationale, I struck my keep opinion. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2023 (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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.