Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Floronic Man

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Floronic Man[edit]

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

This character currently fails to establish notability. The current sources are not used to cite real world information, so they don't really add to the article. The source links show a couple "top X" articles and some speculation about the character possibly being included in a film. None of it really seems important enough to hold an as far as I can tell. TTN (talk) 22:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 22:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Floronic Man is admittedly not an iconic supervillain, but there's still coverage. He is often compared and contrasted with Swamp Thing, a superhero who also has plant-based powers. For example: [1] in PopMatters, [2] in Apocalyptic Transformation (Lexington Books), and [3] in Sexual Ideology in the Works of Alan Moore (McFarland & Company). This is just a Google Books snippet view, but [4] in The Supervillain Book (Visible Ink Press) has seems to have significant coverage of him. And this isn't really in-depth, but [5] in Prince of Stories: The Many Worlds of Neil Gaiman (Macmillan Publishers) has some details about Gaiman's plans for the character. Given the Floronic Man's history with Swamp Thing, I think this needs to be somewhere, and it would probably be out-of-place in Swamp Thing's article. Do we have an article on recurring Swamp Thing villains? If so, that's a possible merge target. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:05, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 16:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; the article should be expanded with a few citations that relate to the real world, but the character has some decent coverage both in the article and just from a quick Google search. It could use more sources, but it certainly appears to be notable. -- Matthew - (talk · userpage · contributions) 21:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While minor, the character's numerous cross-media appearances indicate notability, and this page is a much better place to describe the character than on the numerous pages that link to it. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2016 (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.