Deletion of Horror icon

Comment: Obviously notable topic, as shown by sources that discuss it in depth, and as such it passes  with flying colours. By having a look at the sources, it also seems that Wolfowitz argument of "horror icon" being equal to "great writers" or any other similar generic phrase is not persuasive
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: this |BRAND new article and tag for continued work. More than just the characters themselves, certain actors and film directors (IE: Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney, Jr., Stephen King, Brian De Palma, Alfred Hitchcock, Don Coscarelli, ect.) are considered "horror icons" through their bodies of work, and the topic of "horror icon" is |notable, improvable and sourcable.http://www.totalfilm.com/features/20-greatest-horror-directorshttp://www.popmatters.com/post/176112-the-13-greatest-horror-directors-of-all-time/http://www.businessinsider.com/actors-who-got-their-start-in-horror-movies-2013-10?op=1http://screencrush.com/horror-movie-killers-actors/http://www.popmatters.com/post/176112-the-13-greatest-horror-directors-of-all-time/ and https://www.google.com/search?q=horror+film+actors&oq=horror+film+actors&gs_l=serp.3..0l2j0i22i30l8.45596.47329.0.49105.6.5.0.1.1.0.87.387.5.5.0....0...1c.1.54.serp..0.6.389._mkYDCTMpcQ many https://www.google.com/search?q=horror+film+directors&oq=horror+film+directors&gs_l=serp.3..35i39j0j0i22i30l8.172386.176183.0.176471.9.9.0.0.0.0.90.687.9.9.0....0...1c.1.54.serp..0.9.686.Gqn8z5XX9AU more. The topic of "Horror Icons" has been discussed and analyzes in multple https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Horror+icon%22&gws_rd=ssl book https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Horror+icon%22+site:news.google.com/newspapers&source=newspapers&gws_rd=ssl newspaper, and https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Horror+icon%22&tbm=nws&gws_rd=ssl news sources. I am concerned for for this being improperly tagged for speedy as a "test page" https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horror_icon&diff=626959853&oldid=626958786 11 minutes after creation and then being sent to AFD https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horror_icon&diff=627084410&oldid=626975783 10 hours after the improper prod was declined. So now what? |Lack of sourcing and format issues are not compelling arguments for deletion of a brand new article on an arguably notable topic. Was  followed or any concern toward this topic's 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers (WP:BITE||WP:NRVE||WP:UGLY||WP:BEFORE||WP:POTENTIAL)

Comment: per . The article has rapidly become a collection of poorly sourced laundry lists and unsourced discussions. There are no discernible inclusion criteria, and there really can't be any, beyond "somebody used this phrase to describe somebody or something somewhere. "Horror icon" isn't a meaningful phrase, just a media/popular catchprase. When you look at parallel articles/lists, they're substantively incoherent. Ultimately, distinguishing "horror icons" from horror-related subjects isn't any more worthwhile an effort than distinguishing "movie stars" from actors and actresses, or "great authors" from authors generally. It's not really different from trying to define a canon here, which can't be done without violating NPOV and NOR. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of albums considered the best, while not clearly conclusive, lays out relevant arguments in a similar context
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)