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.
This list is unreferenced and fails
WP:NLIST. An attempt to list all fictional gods, mostly from zillion works of fantasy, is unwieldy. While there are some listicles about "most powerful god in DC comics" or such, I couldn't find any reliable source attempting to replicate such a list (outside Wikipedia). Of course, the concepts of
gods in fiction or such would likely be notable, as an analytical article (my BEFORE does suggest entries on "gods" or such exist in, for example, some encyclopedias of science fiction and fantasy), but a listing of all such entities seems to fail the cited policy (NLIST). I'll add that the previous AfD seems to have a numbe of people confusing this poorly referenced list with the aforementioned "gods in ficton" article, and voting keep, thinking that something could be rescued. Over a year has passed, nothing has been improved, and IMHO nothing here is salvageable (so as far as transforming this into an analytical entry,
WP:TNT applies). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here11:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete Per nom. I watchlist this article due to an LTA who used to slam every character that was ever even remotely hinted to have "celestial" or "god" powers into it with long grandois titles. Keeping it from continuing to spiral out of control is the best I could do, fixing it is likely impossible. It's poorly defined (What is a deity? We have everything from outright gods to demigods to angels to Hercules-style characters). And even then, it is horribly woefully incomplete. I agree with Piotrus that a
gods in fiction article may be something adjacent that could be sourced, however, this list isn't that. If someone believes it was meant to cover gods in fiction more generally, as at least one person stated at the last AFD, then TNT is required to get there. --
ferret (
talk)
13:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete The earlier AfD ended up as "Keep" and it really made no sense. Unless we are saying that "deities" are absolutely real unless they are found in movies, then only it would make sense but we know that is not actually sensible.
Srijanx22 (
talk)
15:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Just under two years ago, the same person nominated the article for deletion, and the 7 others that showed up to vote all said Keep. This is a perfectly valid list article, aids in navigation, links to related articles.
WP:LISTPURPDreamFocus16:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
There is a good reason why at least one of those voters, if not more, were topic banned from participation in deletion discussion. I'll note your own topic ban was discussed - but not implemented; I voted against it back then - but your "keep" vote with no argument pertaining to the article in question is hardly best practices. Please tell us why you think the article should be kept. You link to LISTPURP - fair enough, IMHO that guideline is not met. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here18:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I gave you a clear reason. And what part of that guideline do you not believe is met? Also the list has more information than the category does
Category:Fictional deities so is more useful for those seeking to find information about fictional deities.
DreamFocus19:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep: the list was correctly kept two years ago on the grounds that it fully met the list notability criteria, and that the topic was (and remains now) certainly notable. I don't actually understand why editors should ignore a clear consensus of that type when nothing of significance has changed in the interval — it's close to an abuse of process really. The deletion reasons given above are incorrect and inapplicable.
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
17:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak Delete - While a navigational list on the topic might be valid, there are just too many problems with how this is one is currently presented. First, many of the listed examples are not notable, and do not link to their own articles - not only are there many with no blue links at all, but many of the blue linked entries themselves are misleading, as they do not actually link to an independent article on the deity. Several of the blue linked entries also fail the actual criteria of the list, of "not include deities worshipped by humans in real life that appear in fictional works" - a number of these entries are, in fact, just "real world" deities that happened to have appeared in a piece of fiction. Second, without a single source being used to verify any of this information, the whole thing is filled with
WP:OR - many of the entries here are highly debatable if they are, in fact, "deities", and there are some that I would argue flatly are not. Without valid sourcing, this would not be proper to keep even as a navigational list due to those
WP:OR concerns.
Rorshacma (
talk)
17:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
The "DC" or "Marvel" versions of the characters still do not fall into the scope of the list, which is very specifically stated to be "deities exclusively for fictional works" that "does not include deities worshipped by humans in real life that appear in fictional works". As in, deities that were originally created for a piece of fiction, not "real" deities that have been adapted for a piece of fiction, in the way that the examples you brought up are. This list, as presented, is for "fictional deities", as in, deities that do not "exist", not a list of "real" deities portrayed in fiction, which is an entirely different topic.
Rorshacma (
talk)
18:31, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I fixed it. It now clarifies: This is a list of deities exclusively for
fictional works, organized primarily by media type then by title of the fiction work, series, franchise or author. This list does not include
deities worshiped by humans in real life that appear in fictional works unless they are distinct enough to be mentioned in a Wikipedia article separate than the articles for the entities they are based on.DreamFocus18:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Now, can you show a single, reliable source that contains such a grouping, so that LISTN would be met? Let me help you with what is required: "accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines... The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been". Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here16:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Err, what's the problem with this list again?
WP:NOTCLEANUP is still a thing - if it's unreferenced, just add them yourself. Fictional deities is still a rather prominent category of characters in fiction that deserves to be listed, and most of the links in the list are bluelinks. Listing all fictional gods is unnecessary, just ones that have articles.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
21:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Agree with Piotrus. None of these studies discuss specific fictional gods as a group. One is specific to Final Fantasy, one is specific to a single Virgin Comics line, and the last is about the very concept of fictional deities and building them out, rather than a discussion about a group of already existent characters. Good sources for a
gods in fiction or similar, but does not appear to contribute to LISTN. --
ferret (
talk)
15:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. As pointed out above, mythical deities are discussed as a set in sources (
User:Jclemens has sources right above me), and this meets NLIST. The list article itself is linking to notable Wikipedia entries that themselves have sources. Lists of Wikipedia notable subjects with articles often do not have sources in the list itself, as the references are in the listed articles, that's not a cause for deletion.
PikavoomTalk05:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
@
GizzyCatBella:WP:NLIST is not (only) met by secondary sources listing fictional gods, but rather by secondary sources which discuss "fictional gods" or "gods in fiction" as a "grouping or set in general". For such sources, see below.
Daranios (
talk)
18:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Piotrus: I think a
gods in fiction article would be nice to have. It would be for discussion of the subject. That's no reason not to have a list, which is for annotated navigation between those deific characters which already have articles or article sections on Wikipedia. By this restriction, which in large parts is already implemented in the list as is, solves the problems you have raised.
Daranios (
talk)
16:00, 5 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.