Deletion of List of fictional Alumni of Real Universities

Comment: edit conflict), while I certainly think this is a good faith effort, I believe this list does fail some of the guidelines already pointed out above. It is not a topic that in and of itself has received significant coverage in |reliable, third party sources, failing  and . As per , "Lists, whether they are embedded lists or stand-alone lists, are encyclopedic content as are paragraphs and articles, and they are equally subject to Wikipedia's content policies such as Verifiability, No original research, Neutral point of view, and others." While some of the characters may be notable (and most of them are not), the topic as a whole is not a notable one. There is no extensive reliable, significant coverage discussing the actual topic of "fictional alumni from real universities." I also must agree that with its current name and context, the list does not have enough focus. Notice in the "Characters to be added to the table," three of the items listed are focused lists or topics around that single university, rather than every university. Many university articles do not include this information, as it is generally considered to be trivia/trivial, rather than a notable aspect. The topic itself could also be considered an incorrect one, as most fictional works are set in fictional versions of the universities, based on the real world university, particularly those where the school may be featured in the series itself. All that said, if the list is kept, please fix the name to follow Wikipedia naming conventions (i.e. it should be List of fictional alumni of real universities
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:V||WP:LISTS)

Comment: WP:NOTE.  "If a '''topic''' has received significant coverage in Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources that are Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources|independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable."  Please provide links to reliable third-party sources that discuss this topic in order to demonstrate that it is notable.  Wikipedia is not a reliable third party source.  Note that the discussion is not whether Iron Man, Chuck, and/or Stanford are notable.  The discussion is whether the topic of the article, Fictional Alumni of Real Universities, is notable.  Also, .  ""Original research" is material for which no reliable source can be found. The only way you can show that your edit is not original research is to produce a reliable published source that contains that material."  In the absence of any evidence to the contrary (i.e., the discussion of this topic in reliable third party sources), I stand by my contention that the authour has taken knowledge of a variety of different notable topics, found a common thread among them, and turned that thread into a Wikipedia entry that is itself original research and not notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)