Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bat-Cow

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. Tone 11:23, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bat-Cow[edit]

[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)

Minor fictional creature with no real-world notability. I found four sentences in a Mental Floss listicle and occasional passing mentions from pop culture websites such as Newsarama and CBR. None of this is significant coverage, not even cumulatively. Best case is for this to be a search-term redirect to List of Batman supporting characters, where the Bat-Cow is already mentioned, but an attempt to redirect was reverted. RL0919 (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. RL0919 (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. RL0919 (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - In-Universe cruft that doesn't show up on the Google radarscope thingie in any meaningful way. Fails GNG spectacularly. This is not a hoax, however, as has been speculated on an off-wiki forum, but this is the equivalent of a "biography" of a transformer or a pog... P.S. Thanks to the nominator for bringing this here after I reversed the unilateral decision to redirect. Process is important... Carrite (talk) 02:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:42, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. I think the initial WP:BOLD redirect was appropriate, and redirects are WP:CHEAP. As nominator stated, all the info is there. -2pou (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has a full page entry in the DC Super-Pets Character Encyclopedia and so seems as valid as any of the other animal superheroes. Andrew D. (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That "encyclopedia" is in-universe fictional material, not an independent source that shows notability. --RL0919 (talk) 13:47, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Batman supporting charactersDelete There are no significant reliable sources to indicate any sort of independent notability for this character (and no, an entirely in-universe children's book is not a reliable source). Rorshacma (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had initially supported Redirecting, under the notion of WP:REDIRECTSARECHEAP, and that the character was already listed on said page. However, looking further into this, the character is ridiculously minor, with no reliable secondary sources discussing it, and utterly fails the WP:GNG. Instead of being redirected to the Batman supporting characters list, it should really just be deleted, and have its entry removed from that target article to prevent that list from being a mess of unsourced, non-notable info. Rorshacma (talk) 16:27, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 22:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I laugh at the idea that an entry in the in-universe Super-pets Character Encyclopedia means that we must have a separate entry too. Reywas92^Talk 23:53, 3 November 2019 (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.