Deletion of Fictional history of Spider-Man (3rd nomination)

Comment: History of Superman is encyclopedic (though it too needs references). This article isn't. Where this belongs is at http://marvel.wikia.com/Main_Page Marvel Comics Wikia. This article blatantly fails |no original research policy, as all of it is sourced to primary sources. ALL of it. The Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictional history of Spider-Man (2nd nomination)|last deletion discussion closed with significant voices to clean the article up, source it properly, trim it, etc. Since then, 35 sources have been added; all of them to primary sources. Still badly fails . Badly fails Wikipedia:Notability. Fails  for basing everything on primary sources. All of these issues were extant 1.5 years ago. They're still extant now, with no sign that it's ever going to improve. If there were reliable secondary sources, they would have been found by now. We don't keep articles around for 50 years hoping that some day, somehow, somewhere, somebody is going to find a bevy of secondary sources on this. Even if you ''could'' find reliable secondary sources (which don't exist) it would need to be rewritten to the style of History of Superman. This article has existed for more than three years. It's not going to get better
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:RS||WP:OR)

Comment: I think this article is a valid |split of history from the main Spider-man article. At one point in time, it was probably a part of the main article, but its extremely increasing length, considering the amount of history Spider-man has, made it necessary to split it into a separate article. If the problem that the Delete voters have with the article is that it isn't referenced well enough, like Superman's history page, then that is something that needs to be rectified, though it is not something that would be quite that hard to do, I don't think. In a way, it is more of a content issue. All in all, this article is notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Splitting (WP:SPLIT)

Comment: this is basically a big slab of . As articles progress to FA status the plot is hammered down and rewritten in an out-of-universe manner (see the Superman and Batman examples above), splitting off the FCB to a new article is not the solution to the problem and the fact this has been done a few times doesn't make it right (those other articles will also be nominated in time). There is a solid article to be written about the portrayal of the character over the years (as mentioned above), this just isn't it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PLOT)

Comment: a clear, obvious, textbook example of '''|original research'''.  Everything is sourced to ''primary sources'' -- not a single secondary source in sight.  Moreover, information has been collated from many different, disparate primary sources -- a textbook example of .  Want me to quote a policy on that?  How about this: "Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about material found in a primary source. Do not base articles entirely on primary sources." (From 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN||WP:OR)

Comment: As the article stands right now it is in-univere toned and strrung together based on reader assumptions. At best the content could be transwikied to a related Wikia, if it isn't already there. If there is a serious consideration of mergining... it'll take a ''serious'' weeding not a "slight trim". And part of that would be eliminating plot overload from the :Category:Spider-Man storylines|storylines that currently have their own articles.As for the |other like articles, their existance does not justify this article just as this artilce's existance does not justify thiers. There is no requirement that an AfD for one ''must'' include all. Especially since a lot of those types of nominations get hit with "But each article should be evaluated on its own merits
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF)