Deletion of List of comic science fiction

Comment: We don't delete things simply because they are unsourced, especially lists of obvious blue links, like this.  Per , the onus is on the nominator to search for sources if that's the issue, "''Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability The minimum search expected is...''".  There are certainly sources to be found such as ''https://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/dec/30/sciencefictionfantasyandhorror.bestbooks Rob Grant's top 10 comic science fiction novels
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: a useful list. As a stand alone list it makes sense. Lack of sources is never a deletion rationale per  and . If I feel ambitious I add refs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEXIST||WP:NOTCLEANUP)

Comment: As a  list. There is no distinct criteria for inclusion whatsoever and membership of the list appears highly subjective. For example, would Big Hero 6 really be considered "comic" or just lighthearted kids entertainment that includes goofy moments? Might be encyclopedic if totally rewritten or refactored, but I doubt that any of the keep voters here plan to so much as touch it with regards to fixing its systemic issues
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: I agree with {{u|Andrew Davidson}} - Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists seems to be met as it's a major literary genre and the list topic could, in principle, satisfy Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Selection criteria as there is enough to demarcate between what is and isn't relevant, thus satisfying the |Wikipedia is not a directory hurdle.  I agree that the sourcing could be improved, especially for the selection criteria, but I wouldn't say it's |worthy of dynamite
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR||WP:DYNAMITE)