Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of supercouples
How is this article based on opinion? It's not. As Orlady points out, this is not a case of . If the public, media, and critics don't define who is a supercouple, then who will? When it comes to lists on Wikipdedia, this is one of the better ones, considering that most lists on Wikipedia are unreferenced or mostly unreferenced. It's not an opinion which couples are supercouples, but a fact. Just like the ''Associated Press'' points out that it is fact that Spider-Man (Peter Parker) and Mary Jane Watson are a supercouple.http://media.www.ndsmcobserver.com/media/storage/paper660/news/2008/01/18/Scene/Comic.Book.Supercouple.Splits.Fans.Cry.Collective.Tear-3157300.shtml This list was originally in the Supercouple article to give readers a more in-depth view and history of the many supercouples that have come and gone, or are still present today. That's what this article does, with valid references. It was too big to stay in the Supercouple article and needed its own article. It's not that different than having a List of fictional anti-heroes. Except that this list is better formatted. As for only one reference in the lead working, I'll check on that. The others should work, but two of them may not be able to be viewed anymore due to needing to buy the books to read those two sources online. Other than that, there is no reason that this list shouldn't exist. And the Supercouple article a right mess? Not the mess it was before I got to it. It's not in bad shape at all, and is no worse shape than than the Superhero article. It needs an origin of the term section and some tweaks, but that's about it. But, really, the origin is already stated in the lead. There isn't much more to state than that
— User:Flyer22, 02:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)