The result was keep. Discussion regarding editorial decisions should continue at the article's talk page. – Juliancolton | Talk 20:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC) reply
The whole article as the title indicates is a plot summary. A development history of the character would be fine but this? no. In addition to the fact that we don't write plot summaries, the article is inherently misleading because it presents the history as a linear narrative when none exist and therefore is original research (because the dating of some events is unclear and you have to guess where to place them). Cameron Scott ( talk) 08:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete Unwarranted content fork. Basically one big in-universe plot summary. Not even worth merging into the main article. WesleyDodds ( talk) 10:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep but needs to be sourced. Also check the what links here to see how many red links it would make. And it is a popular page. Average of 600+ hits per day and sometimes more than 1k. Mark E ( talk) 12:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - while it can be agreed that the current construction of the article into a faux lineation is problematic, it is not irresolvable. The article, and others similar, have been nominated, and the nfailed to come to consensus regarding deletion. Regarding this article, 3rd party sources about storylines and fictional history are availabe in abundance [1], [2], [3]. The creation of a fictional history provides help to manage a popular and ever-growing page, [4]. This page needs to exist to create a centralized point to manage such fictional material, which has merit due to the iconic nature of the character (regardless of how well or poorly it has been managed).- Sharp962 ( talk) 02:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC). reply