Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darwinian poetry
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 keep. John254 15:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Darwinian poetry
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by / madness, starving hysterical naked, / dragging themselves through the non-notable articles of the AfD discussions / looking for an angry fix... (Apologies to Ginsberg) Ecoleetage (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- It'd be a shame / to delete a versicle / so many noted. —Quasirandom (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- (That's a keep, and those were just in the first dozen ghits, without even looking to news/books/scholar. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC))
- Keep. notable, encyclopedic, soured (per above). What is there not to love? --S.dedalus (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- The cherry blossoms / remain in their buds, alas -- / it isn't sourced yet. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep per Quasirandom. I added a couple of sources he cited to the article. Nsk92 (talk) 02:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- The blossoms burst forth! / While I contemplated them / the sources appeared. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC) (okay, I'll stop now)
Response I have to question the notion of "so many hits." And as for the existing coverage, if you take a closer look you will see that this was a one-hit novelty story from 2003 -- there's been no significant coverage since. And the discussion boards on the Darwinian Poetry web site have no talk beyond 2004. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- a) That wasn't a "so many hits" as a specific "these several reliable sources have noted." b) Notablity does not expire. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thou still notable bride of Web 2.0/ Thou foster-child of Silence and slow Time/ Notability is permanent and permanence notability / that is all ye know on Earth, and all ye need to know. (Jeez we are such geeks :) ) Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 14:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Notability / does not bloom then blow away / like cherry blossoms. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thou still notable bride of Web 2.0/ Thou foster-child of Silence and slow Time/ Notability is permanent and permanence notability / that is all ye know on Earth, and all ye need to know. (Jeez we are such geeks :) ) Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 14:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep.
Is it not passing brave to be a king
On yon small screen of ABC News?
Is it not passing brave to be a king
And ride in triumph in the New York Times?- Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC) - Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- The fitness of the topic's inclusion to Wikipedia
is judged through our notability criteria.
General notability criteria state
that the topic should have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
One does not need to go through AfD or DR or ArbCom
to !vote Keep if satisfactory sources are already in the article.
(Not really Darwinian poetry, but I hope this is as close you can get to NPOV poetry.) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:32, 25 May 2008 (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.
