Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archaeology in fiction

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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archaeology in fiction

Contested ProD. Unverified original research. An unencyclopaedic essay. Unsearchable title, orphaned article. -- IslaySolomon | talk 01:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete until we get top men on this article... top men. Danny Lilithborne 01:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Purely original research and orphaned article. Cheers -- Imoeng 01:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete personal essay. Opabinia regalis 02:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete personal essay full of OR and POV. JChap2007 02:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per above. SuperDT 13:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, but suggest user-fication. The subject may well be worthy of an article, but this needs work. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete There could be an article on this toopic, since there have been dozens of books and movies which were fiction about archeologists, but to be encyclopedic it would have to cite more references. This is a pleasant OR essay, but not quite up to the standard. Edison 15:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: FWIW, there's a fairly nice bibliography of archeology in fiction here by Anita G. Cohen-Williams. It apparently dates to 1994, and needs updating to reflect Tomb Raider; it's also incomplete (no Journey to the Center of the Earth?) but it might be a good start. It also suggests themes around which a better article could be written: artifact (fantasy); Lost World (genre), stories set in prehistory. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Delete. Original research. Apart from the first ssentence, which is rubbish, a good read, but just someone's essay. 17:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

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.