Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superman curse (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Superman curse

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

This article has gone through several variations over the years. In its current incarnation, it appears to be mostly a reiteration of a single article which focused on the idea of debunking the idea of a curse on the Superman role. As such, Teri Hatcher, whom nobody considers a victim of a "Superman curse", as far as I know, is listed under "alleged victims of the curse" -- where it is denied that she has suffered from any Superman curse. In fact, she is mentioned before either George Reeves or Christopher Reeve, the two people most commonly associated with the idea of a curse on the Superman role. Although I agree that the idea of a Superman curse ought to be discredited, I don't think this article really accomplishes anything by presenting the idea of a "Superman curse" only to spend most of its space debunking that idea. This might be worth a couple of sentences in the George Reeves or Christopher Reeve articles, but I don't think it is worth an article of its own. Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hatcher is listed before Reeves or Reeve because the people in question are listed in alphabetical order. The content regarding Hatcher reltes Brian McKernan's argument that she is one of the persons involved in a Superman adaptation whose success disproves the curse. I've renamed the main section "People involved with Superman in media" to reflect this. Nightscream (talk) 15:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article seems to me to focus too much on presenting evidence about whether such a curse may or may not actually exist (which is unencyclopedic nonsense), and not enough on the sort of material that might make the article encyclopedic, which is the history of the discussion and comment that the supposed "curse" has generated. OK, there are a few "so-and-so says" quotes, but the laundry list of people's misfortunes seems a bit silly. 86.160.213.4 (talk) 20:33, 10 September 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, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is a tough call. About a dozen books mention the "superman curse" in passing, but none have an entire chapter dedicated to it or analyze it in detail. There are quite a few mentions on the internet: but mostly informal blogs. The only decent sources is CNN.com (already cited in the article) but even that is CNN.com, not CNN proper, and it is a tiny article with no real depth. The problem with including this article in WP is that it become a self-justifying article: WP would help promote this marginal urban legend. And, BTW, Snopes.com does not mention the superman curse at all. Put all that together = delete. --Noleander (talk) 01:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Patent nonsense.--Cox wasan (talk) 07:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there are enough reliable sources to establish notability. For instance, http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WolfFiles/story?id=2103736 and http://www.torontosun.com/entertainment/movies/2011/04/01/17838401.html 174.252.73.73 (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per 174... Plenty of reliable sources exist. Besides that, and the smaller CNN article, there is the Evening Standard, the Metro, Wired, and no doubt plenty of others, that was less than a minute's web searching. --GRuban (talk) 14:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It looks like there are plenty of reliable sources about the topic: Wired, Variety, The Guardian, Telegraph, etc. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The Wired article cited above cites Wikipedia as one of its two sources (the other is IMDb). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:33, 22 September 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, Rcsprinter (talk) 18:07, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Stupid, but people in reliable publications are talking about it so notable. Readers might want to know about it. Steve Dufour (talk) 22:52, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 05:47, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete The sourcing has some serious problems:
Richard Prior entry - source only mentions multiplesclerosis - claiming that his other problems are due to this curse is a violation of WP:SYNTH
George Reeves - first source does not treat the curse as a "superstition" (which the article claims it is)
Kate Bosworth - cited article states "reportedly". No evidence Bosworth actually believes/said that. Clear violation of WP:NOTGOSSIP and WP:NEWSORG ("Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should include information verified by reliable sources")
Dean Cain - has had a succesful career, the only person claiming he's victim of a curse is the author of the opinion piece cited (see WP:V, WP:RS)
Brandon Routh - makes throwaway (i.e. trivial) comment that no curse exists.
Christopher Reeve - CNN citation only mentions paralysis, article uses it to infer his death is due to the curse (violation of WP:SYNTH)
Teri Hatcher - has had a succesful career, the only person linking her to a curse is the author of the opinion piece cited.
In summing up, this article is a tabloid-esque series of policy violations that is mostly based on a single ABC News opinion piece and attempts to use other sources to back up original research. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 11:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any relevant articles to the Superman (film series) page and Delete. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:11, 30 September 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.