Homosexuality in the Batman franchise: It seems to be fundamentally based on certain affirmations by one single psychiatrist, Fredric Wertham.  But Wertham proposed quite flawed and controversial theories about comics, and claimed that Batman had homosexual subliminal messages, among other things, in order to support his theory that comic books were perverting children.  The rest of the article seems to be a collection of quotes from different people linking homosexuality and Batman, for different unrelated reasons.  In addition, the end of the article states that there are several LGBT characters in the Batman comics, but that is not uncommon in comics in general nowadays.  This aspect does not seem something specific to the Batman franchise, nor seems linked to previous information contained in the article.  As a character that has existed for over 80 years in comic books, TV series, films, and all kind of media, it would be possible to write all kinds of articles in the format “Topic X in the Batman franchise”.  It would be also possible to propose a link between any other major comic book character and homosexuality by following the same strategy of cherrypicking information that, on the whole, does not associate or relate in any meaningful way.  If the creator of the character, Bob Kane, had been homosexual and had said that he created Batman with the purpose of subtly expressing that, we would have a strong case to support this article.  But as it is, the connection between the topic of homosexuality and the Batman franchise seems forced and not justified, because the only aspect of the Batman mythos that could have consistently suggested an homosexual understone is simply that Batman and Robin are two men living together.  It is not enough.  ( JohnMizuki ( talk ) 20:50, 27 October 2023 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 October 28 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 15:45, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Sexuality and gender .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - The argument in this deletion justification reads to me as "This article isn't notable, it's just (insert list of the same things that make this article notable)".  The fact that the theories are flawed does not make them not worth examining, as several sources have by your own admission dedicated paper and ink to this subject.  Otherwise, we might as well delete the pages on e.g. Flat Earth , Young Earth creationism , and the like, because if they're not true, they can't be notable.  On top of that, the assertion "As a character that has existed for over 80 years in comic books, TV series, films, and all kind of media, it would be possible to write all kinds of articles" is literally just WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST .  Deletion reasoning feels inherently flimsy.  KaiEnTai-DX-Fan ( talk ) 17:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - notable and well-referenced.  The nominator says The existence of this article doesn’t seem justified.  It seems to be fundamentally based on certain affirmations by one single psychiatrist, Fredric Wertham. " . Fredric Wertham, is in fact cited in the lede: Gay interpretations have been part of the academic study of the Batman franchise at least since psychiatrist Fredric Wertham asserted in his 1954 book Seduction of the Innocent that "Batman stories are psychologically homosexual". But then the article cites (with 59 references) many subsequent discussions over the years in popular culture and the entertainment industry. Even the guy who played Robin acknowledged this issue. I doubt many of these people ever heard of Fredric Wertham. This is a long article: 32,000+ bytes [29] that's been edited by 342 editors [30] over 14 years. It was nominated for deletion once before and kept–and that was when it was half the size and had half the references it has now. Finally, ask any cynical male teenager and they'll tell you, "of course he's gay–everybody knows that".  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 18:04, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Bonus pic: Batbed.png -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 18:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The fact that the only evidence from the classic comics that keeps being provided to support the theory is 1 single decontextualized comic book panel, says it all.  On the other hand, the evidence for a heterosexual Batman is overwhelming.  JohnMizuki ( talk ) 09:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This article is notable and worth keeping.  The OP's reasoning is fatally flawed.  Historyday01 ( talk ) 18:45, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Well sourced at the beginning, then veers off into non-RS near the end.  I'd perhaps rewrite, but seems notable.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:04, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The example image was drawn in a different time and Harley Quinn isn't that old a series.  Maybe stop jumping the gun like this and instead focus on topics with some mileage behind 'em.  If you're interested in writing about queers, Homosexuality in the Inca empire has, undoubtedly, SCADS of reliably-sourced articles written on it.  There, go nuts.  Americanfreedom ( talk ) 13:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep The nomination itself talks about what makes it notable, seems to feel like a WP:IDONTLIKEIT Questions?  four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep