Deletion of Alternative versions of Doctor Strange

Comment: no evidence that this meets ; quite the reverse
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFICTION)

Comment: This is just a spin-off from the main article and, insofar as it's a list of the various takes on the character, it passes  – see ''https://www.cbr.com/strangest-of-the-strange-the-strangest-versions-of-doctor-strange/ Strangest of the Strange'', for example.  Applicable policies include ; ; ; &c
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:ATD||WP:NOTPAPER||WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: to Doctor Strange per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)

Comment: I can see how this is redundant with the Doctor Strange article with not much to cover outside of various plot summaries and excerpts. But there has been a consistent practice to merge comic characters with similar non-notable spinouts. See the AFDs for: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Gambit|Gambit, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Storm|Storm, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Jean Grey|Jean Grey, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Venom|Venom, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of the Thing|The Thing, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Rogue|Rogue, all of which were '''merged''' or '''redirected'''. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative versions of Daredevil|Daredevil was deleted, but that's an outlier. I'm sure I missed a few others. I think we should always strive to  and use |alternatives to deletion. (Pardon the copy-paste rationale, which I used at a similar AFD for Deadpool, but the rationale is truly about consistent best practice across many similar articles
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE||WP:ATD)

Comment: as failing  including  and  due to excessive detail from primary sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFICTION||WP:GNG||WP:WAF)

Comment: excessive minutiae about various incarnations of a fictional character. All the sources in this article are primary, and I cannot find any secondary sources that treat "Alternative versions of Doctor Strange" as a topic. At best you could find something about individual incarnations, though even that is a sketchy prospect, but combining them into one topic absolutely ''is'' . The main Doctor Strange article is already crufty enough and would not be improved by merging any of this dubious content there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)