Naruto universe: 1989 ( talk ) 15:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , Anime and manga ,  and Martial arts .  1989 ( talk ) 15:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article "Naruto Universe" likely provides quality information about the creative process behind the Naruto, Naruto Shippuden, and Boruto series due to its in-depth exploration of the development, storytelling, characters, world-building, and the creative team's insights.  It might offer details on the thematic elements, and the evolution of the franchise, making it a valuable resource for understanding the intricacies of the fictional universe.  It is definitely not just a combination of other articles, as it has its own distinctiveness, and lots of different references in French, English and Japanese.  All of this should be definitely considered.  Carlos Eduardo Wester Pérez ( talk ) 16:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Carlos Eduardo Wester Pérez : Why can't this just be summed up in Naruto#Development ?  Also, do we really need to go into the origins of Chakra , and Jutsu when we already have articles on the subjects?  Just say the series was inspired by them without going into extensive detail.  - Knowledgekid87 ( talk ) 18:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] * Keep per WP:WAX as no actual deletion argument for this article in particular has been presented.  - Knowledgekid87 ( talk ) 17:33, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Tintor2 made a note on the creator's talk page it may fail WP:GNG and WP:FANCRUFT .  That and the previous AfDs I linked above is what made me bring it here.  1989 ( talk ) 17:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for providing a rationale, I struck my keep opinion.  - Knowledgekid87 ( talk ) 18:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:GNG and WP:FANCRUFT (as nom indicated).  Looking through this article I only see links to primary sources, and works that were done by the company involved.  This doesn't establish real world notability unless independent input from those in the industry are involved.  Has the "Naruto universe" had an impact outside of its fan base?  I get the feeling all of this can covered better at Wikia .  - Knowledgekid87 ( talk ) 18:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ; pure WP:FANCRUFT material and the article only contains primary sources.  Xexerss ( talk ) 19:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ; I agree with Xexerss.  Every source in this page is a primary source (being a volune of the series or interview) and no good secondary have been found.  While this article is a GA in French, this article is almost an exact translation of the French article, which makes me wonder how this is a GA in French.  I would say merge or redirect but I'm not sure where it should be redirected to and I can't see anything worth merging.  Link20XX ( talk ) 19:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Almost the entirety of this article is in-universe plot information.  The only bits that don't fall into this is the "Creation and design" section at the top, and the main Naruto article already has a much better "Production" section that covers the development.  There does not appear to be a single non-primary source being used here, so there is nothing that would need to be merged or preserved.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 20:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect .  The 'Creation and design' is interesting, but sadly, it is referenced 99% to an artbook ( WP:PRIMARY ).  Nothing else here suggests this meets WP:SIGCOV .  My BEFORE doesn't show any great sources, although the term is used in a few scholarly works, so at minimum, we should have a redirect here.  Maybe one day someone will find sufficient soruces to estabilish how this meets WP:GNG , but for now, yes, this is WP:FANCRUFT .  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 11:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not enough reliable independent sources to support WP:GNG .  it's possible that such a long-running series has a notable universe, but this would still be a case of WP:TNT .  The article would need to be rebuilt from proper sources.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 03:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is pure FANDOM content and is much better off in the Naruto Wiki than on Wikipedia, as it is of little interest to a non-fan of the series.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 22:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:GNG as far as I can tell.  WP:FANCRUFT is an essay so I don't think it should be cited here.  Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk ) 14:38, 3 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: delete