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. -- Cirt (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tor Cyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non notable fictional character. Lacks credible sources.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:N due to a lack of independent and reliable sources, outside the fictional work, with significant coverage. Edison (talk) 21:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Re: Nom. Fictional is not a criteria for deletion. Credible is a very low standard; are you sure you would not prefer, 'reliable'? Re: Blo: Copy-paste of N. Show me don't tell me.

Recurring character in 2000 AD with 21 appearances, scores of entry data pages on Comic Book Database consisting of individual issues, artists, and series, and five other secondary sources. See the article.

Rewrote and added sources. Anarchangel (talk) 12:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, though the sources could use some work. In the event that the article is not kept it should be Merged to Rogue Trooper. Artw (talk) 03:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I have reformatted the article from an article about the character into an article about the eponymous series. I presume the notability of the series to be higher than that of the character, but I won't comment on if that's sufficient. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Different comic book series are named for the guy. The second reference linked "Tor Cyan: Blue Murder (Pt 1)". If they are publishing that many titles with the character, and he gets popular enough to have his own series published for him, from a notable comic book line, he must be notable. Dream Focus 19:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron. SnottyWong ^gab 19:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Is http://www.comicbookdb.com considered a reliable source? SnottyWong ^gab 19:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: fails WP:NBOOK. Whether www.comicbookdb.com is WP:RS or not, it does not constitute "non-trivial published works". No indication that this minor 2000 AD serial has received the degree of coverage that the likes of The Ballad of Halo Jones or Judge Dredd did. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I don't think that this article should have been nominated for deletion.  Also, Tor Cyan is not a book, so WP:NBOOK applies only marginally.  In addition to many web-site hits, I see several web pages dedicated to Tor Cyan.  Each such independent site is a reliable source for the narrow purpose of establishing notability of Tor Cyan.  This is not surprising for a character and series associated with a mass-produced comic book.  Based on personal experience, six issues of a comic book dedicated to one character is sufficient for people to talk about that character for decades.

For future reference, please note that the norms and practices of Wikipedia:Guide to deletion were not followed prior to this discussion.  From Wikipedia:Guide to deletion,

• first do the necessary homework and look for sources yourself, and invite discussion on the talk page by using the {{notability}} template, if you are disputing the notability of an article's subject. The fact that you haven't heard of something, or don't personally consider it worthy, are not criteria for deletion. You must look for, and demonstrate that you couldn't find, any independent sources of sufficient depth.RB  66.217.117.201 (talk) 09:37, 14 January 2011 (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.