Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harpies in popular culture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result was redirect to Harpy#Harpies in popular culture. Spartaz Humbug! 09:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Harpies in popular culture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No sources, nothing but a list of "This work has a harpy in it". Same faults as most other "in popular culture" lists. Just trivia. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge Divine Comedy, The Last Unicorn and maybe Jason and the Argonauts to Harpies and get rid of the trivial rest. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There's no need to keep this article purely for the sake of merger. This is yet another case of Mintrick sweeping undesired content under the rug into a separate "popular culture" article, and people opining to merge it back in once it comes to AFD — a loop that you'll find described at User:Uncle G/Cargo cult encyclopaedia article writing. There have been quite a few of Mintrick's "in popular culture" articles come to AFD over the years. As with the rest, this content was in the original Harpy article in the first place and was removed from it by Mintrick in 2008 to place it here. Ironically, as can be seen, the sweeping under the rug tactic hasn't worked, as it never does, and the main article has, since 2008, even started growing an "in popular culture" section of its own. Uncle G (talk) 00:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge. The main article still needs to have some sort of content in this form. As a reader, I look forward to seeing sections like these when I happen to be looking at fictional species. They are more or less the same as an "appearances" section of a character, but instead of one series, its many different ones. I think stuff like this can be sourced and written as prose instead of list format. Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Harpy#Harpies in popular culture. Per WP:V, unsourced contested content should not be merged, but the redirect allows people to merge the few relevant entries from the history if they also provide sources. Sandstein 00:56, 6 January 2011 (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.