Deletion of List of omnipotent fictional characters

Comment: Per the arguments above, the list would have to be renamed to something like "List of fictional characters for whom claims of omnipotence have been made", if it were to be maintainable.  This highlights a notability concern, as there seems no reason that list is notable.  Any character in a storyline can assert someone is omnipotent.  If there have been reliable sources which discuss the question of which characters are regarded as omnipotent, so that belonging to this list is clearly a matter of encyclopaedic interest to comics readers, then the list might be justified.  However, then inclusion would have to depend on those sources to avoid problems with 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: violates  and concerns about reliability of sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: without prejudice per much of the above, but in my mind primarily for redundancy and an inherently arbitrary design.  1) Redundancy: the majority of this list mirrors in miniature the existing articles Cosmic entities (Marvel Comics) and Cosmic entities (DC Comics), lists of characters of a certain type that at least ignore questions of level of power while still giving basic descriptions and links.  2) Arbritrary: the problem with almost all lists of this sort generally falls under the guidelines of #IINFO|indescriminate collections of information.  Peregrine Fisher does indeed have a valid point that wikipedia does not care if these characters are omnipotent or not, only whether it is possible to cite that they have been described as such.  However, this begs the question of whether one description of an adjective merits a list.  I doubt there would be much debate about an AfD for "List of Strong Fictional Characters" or "List of Generous Fictional Characters" regardless of the quality of citation.  As used, "Omnipotent" is simply a descriptive modifier, only of interest because it appears to be a larger and more impressive modifier than other adjectives.  I respect the work put into this list, but given the duplication of work of most of it, I can't bring myself to suggest keeping given that underlying problem
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Delete'''  a list of which fictional characters some editors think are omnipotent
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: meets , is sourced. #PAPER
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST||WP:NOT)

Comment: per the excellent reasoning of the nominator. POV/OR concerns abound. Noting also that arguments like |"It could be useful" and "It's interesting" are not particularly compelling. Although I must say I would be hard-pressed to !vote to delete List of fictional characters whose mamas are so fat
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL)