Deletion of Types of mythological or fantastic beings in contemporary fiction

Comment: The very first source that I found when checking this out was https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=UcbYqb8D4IEC this whole academic book about the subject from a reliable publisher. Notability is a function of the article subject, not of the current state of an article. The previous comments all seem to be based on  with no indication that any attempt has been made to find sources. Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: but it needs work. It could be used for navigation: "Lists that fulfill wikipedia:LISTPURP|recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability." () I added Stargate with links to specific creatures. The scope of the article needs to be improved: what is classic (include "gothic"?), which settings (franchises/multiple media, equivalent to 20? books/10? movies/100? episodes), which types (10? max, generalized). I would say inclusion of a setting needs at least 3? columns/articles to link to in the table. Sources could be added to column or row headers or individual cells. These beings tie in with Jungian archetypes, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, The Seven Basic Plots
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: WP:NOR,  and not well sourced synthesis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:FANCRUFT)