Deletion of Batman villain bibliographies

Comment: I don't agree that the information within these articles is #Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information|indiscriminate. None of the examples listed are pertinent and I don't think that these bibliographies violate the spirit of the policy. Morever, as stated in meta:Wiki is not paper|Wiki is not paper, there is no reason why there shouldn't be an article for every Simpsons character and a table listing every episode. As such, I see no reason why there shouldn't be a complete bibliography for these prominent members of Batman's rogues gallery. As for the argument that upkeep would be a problem, I don't agree. With the exception of Catwoman, none of these characters is featured in a monthly series. While I would agree that trying to maintain a catalog of every appearance by Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man is a fool's errand, those are special cases (and if some fool volunteers, I won't stop him). However, on average, I don't anticipate that there will be more than one or two new issues to add to these lists each month. This is easily managable. Also, as far as whether the publisher chooses to create a similar bibliography, I don't think that's relevant. Either this information does belong on Wikipedia or it doesn't. This is my vote to say that it does
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)