Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Adventures of Superboy

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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 21:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Adventures of Superboy

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Deprodded with "obviously notable" but I couldn't find any sources. Nothing useful on Newspapers.com, ProQuest, or Google Books. The show was never aired, and doesn't appear to have even been finished. Current sources in article are not reliable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a TV show for which only the pilot was made. There is no justification for a full article on this subject.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Added a couple of refs,
WP:N yet but it seems reachable. Google Books search turned up results in a couple of books [1][2] which I'll have to do some confirmation on but look very promising. Artw (talk) 16:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Everything I've found on GBooks appears to be a mere directory listing. Ten Pound Hammer • ⁽What did I screw up now?) 17:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would disagree. Also "Nothing on Newspapers.com, ProQuest, or Google Books." is not the same as "mere directory listing" even if that was the case. Artw (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I left out a word. Nothing significant found. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Have confirmed that there is an entire dedicated chapter in Superman on Film, Television, Radio and Broadway. Artw (talk) 22:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nomination in bad faith. Artw (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the bad faith? I pointed out that the current sources in the article are not reliable, and that I was unable to find any better sources. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You ruled out a potential avenue for finding sources without apparently exploring it. Possibly accidental but your response is telling not, you just don’t care. Artw (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Nothing useful on Newspapers.com, ProQuest, or Google Books." Which avenue did I leave out? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
YChanged the wording to cover up after yourself does not make it any better. And it's probably still not true. Artw (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because no one in the history of Wikipedia has ever left out a word when typing before, right? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see we are now at “deleting random chunks of the article.” Artw (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Half of the paragraph was sourced to IMDb, which is not a reliable source. The other half was not sourced at all. Per
WP:V: Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:57, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Removing material that could be verified and contribute to notability during an AfD is pretty underhanded. The material was not in any way contentious or hyperbolic. I have restored it with "citation needed" flags. Argento Surfer (talk) 11:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a point in keeping unsourced information around.
WP:V says that you can remove unsourced info. I don't see how it's "underhanded". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 14:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Normally, I'd agree. I've spent a great deal of time removing unsourced material. During AfD, however, unsourced information can guide interested editors to sources. In this case, you removed information about a book and a documentary that cover the subject. Personally, I'm surprised you'd put any effort at all into improving an article you actively trying to delete. What's the point? Argento Surfer (talk) 18:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW the book itself mentions having the scripts on it's back cover [3], and there's a fair chance some other book source does too, though I haven't located anything yet. There's also an interview on a fannish site here [4]. Feels like with some pushing something usable might be unearthed.

For the documentary with a clip there's a few DVD reviews that mention it covers Superboy but nothing that says it has a clip, and frankly that seems a bit low value anyway. The documentary itself is on Youtube[5] and may itself be a source on Superboy, though using it as a source for its own contents might be weird. Artw (talk) 20:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to problems with the AfD have added new sources which should be sufficient. Artw (talk) 23:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per this, this, and this. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convniced "Warped Factor" is a reliable source, as the writers are credited only by first name and there's no editor credit. The two book sources are very tangential mentions; hell, the first one isn't even a full sentence. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:11, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to the other evidence of notability and sources, the fact that the show was set in the Superman universe, involving one of the most iconic characters imaginable, also supports notability. Frankly I don't sympathize much with the ongoing drive to decimate our popular-culture coverage, but this is a particularly ill-chosen instance of it. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The first episode was completed and included with the DVD collection of Smallville. Coverage exist at https://www.cbr.com/comic-book-legends-revealed-343/ and elsewhere. Dream Focus 16:45, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
WP:NMEDIA in its own right. MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect to Superboy. The keep arguments from Dream Focus and Newyorkbrad are both lacking in any policy basis. Being included on a DVD collection as a bonus feature is not evidence of notability. Neither is simply existing in the Superman universe. Reminder to both that this was a non-aired pilot, not a complete television show that was broadcast. There are insufficient sources to indicate notability. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Following up on my comment above from before the relist). The reason I think it's relevant that this proposed/aborted series is in the Superman universe it that this fact makes it more likely that someone with an interest in Superman/Superboy would hear about a Superboy series from 1961, during the relatively early years of telephone, and would consult Wikipedia to find out more about it. I think he or she would benefit from seeing the relevant information laid out in the separate, if brief, Wikipedia article we now have. If the page is redirected to the main Superboy page, then either the information in this article will all be merged into that article, which would further lengthen an already substantial article and potentially create weighting issues, or else valuable information would be lost. I do not see it as a priority to delete this type of article in any event, but I find it especially undesirable under these circumstances. Put differently, I see value to our readers from keeping the article and no downside to doing so, which at the end of the day is the ultimate conclusion one is reaching any time one casts a keep !vote. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
WP:NOPAGE, where a separate article would not be an appropriate spinout. Its already been mentioned above, but the above keep votes whose arguments are that its inherently notable because its related to Superman, or that its inherently notable due to it being included in a Smallville DVD are both invalid arguments for Keeping. Rorshacma (talk) 13:53, 13 June 2022 (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.