Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hermes 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 delete, not userfying. --Coredesat 05:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hermes in popular culture

Hermes in popular culture (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Trivia collection, consisting of straightforward, trivial usage of the appropriate myths. Unacceptable per WP:FIVE and WP:NOT#IINFO. Users worried about the main article should know that I watch it and will keep it clean. Eyrian 18:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Simply an indiscriminate collection of information, mixing incidental references to Hermes with more significant uses of the figure, and making no attempt to provide analysis or to place its contents in the context of reception of classical mythology more generally. However, some of the works mentioned could be added to Category:Greco-Roman mythology in popular culture or subcats, and the most significant appearances of Hermes in post-classical art and literature could be discussed in the Hermes article. EALacey 19:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Could you indicate which ones you're talking about? I can't see any that are particularly relevant. Shakespeare is certainly important, but his use there is as mere allusion to a well-understood myth. --Eyrian 19:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Comment. The one that struck me as possibly noteworthy was the novel Quicksilver, with Hermes as the main character. However, it seems that this novel lacks a Wikipedia article, suggesting it probably isn't notable enough to mention in Hermes. And I see that the films mentioned are already in Category:Films based on Greco-Roman mythology. So, I think we should just delete this article without duplicating its contents elsewhere. EALacey 19:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The creator of this article is on a short Wikibreak to deal with some real life issues, according to notes on his Talk page. I suggest that we give him a fair chance to voice his opinion, which might extend the time required to resolve this AfD. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 19:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - Popular culture references are not in themselves at all an indiscriminate collection of information, so that argument as rationale for deleting is completely baseless. Could it use improvement? Sure, but then lots of articles can. If you don't think it's good right now, EDIT IT. This information can certainly be written in an encyclopedic way, and it's important enough information (though the trivia parts can be deleted) and needs some place in this project, and there's not a good way to keep it on the main article. We've been splitting these off into separate articles for years now. That's the Wikipedia way. We have a stream of people nominating any pop culture articles for deletion, and they should be warned to stop as a gross violation of the WP:POINT violation. (I am at my new location and have limited Internet connectivity, so saw this and came to vote.) DreamGuy 19:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    • How is this a violation of WP:POINT? Am I gaming the system? Making a practical parody? Lashing out after one of my articles was deleted? I have the good faith belief that all of the articles that I nominate should be deleted, and I think that this belief is supported by policy. --Eyrian 19:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. Reception is an important aspect of the topic of classical mythology and should indeed be discussed, but cataloguing mentions of Hermes in manga subtitles etc. isn't the way to go about that, any more than cataloguing mentions of Hermes in Greek inscriptions would be a good way to produce an article on his worship in antiquity. If someone wishes to find reliable academic works on reception of Greek mythology and compose an article discussing their analyses, that would potentially make an excellent article, but I don't see how having this article here would facilitate that. EALacey 20:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Simply an indiscriminate collection of information. GlassFET 19:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all articles ending in "in popular culture", but since that won't happen... Articles like these tend to grow into oversize trivia pages, which are, by definition, an indiscriminate collection of information. Sean William @ 19:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:TRIVIA. Not much else to say. Bulldog123 22:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - directory of loosely associated trivial mentions. Otto4711 00:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I'm sure author wanted to call this Mercury in pop culture, rather than Hermes, but Mercury is too ambiguous. Sorry, but this is a list of people with wings on their feet, actors who landed the Hermes role in the Greek myth epic, etc. If it's reworked, then call it "Hermes/Mercury in popular culture", because most of us think of the fast guy as Mercury. Mandsford 01:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • 'Most of us think of the fast guy as Mercury'...please avoid making such claims....please? Because even if we were to accept and/or dispute this claim, without a scientific poll, all our banter would be useless CaveatLectorTalk 03:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete This article. An article on the Classical Tradition is dying to be written though...maybe I'll do it someday. CaveatLectorTalk 03:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Calm down. What I meant (see source) was that most of us think of him as "Mercury" rather than "Hermes". [1]. Let me make another claim.... most people believe that "Hermes" is something you can get if you're not careful [2]. Mandsford 11:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. nn Carlossuarez46 20:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. DreamGuy made the article as a place to dump the garbage from the Hermes article. He should be happy if it now gets deleted. Dicklyon 22:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Because of policies: 1) 'WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information', 2) 'Wikipedia:Avoid_trivia_sections_in_articles', 3) 'WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory', 4) NOT 'Wikipedia:Five_pillars'. --Standardname 03:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep (without prejudice to later renomination) per the comments of User:Melsaran and myself at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Eyrian. The nominator is, broadly speaking, right that wikipedia should be purged of inappropriate trivia: however he and the other delete voters in this and a string of related AfDs are immediatists. The right approach is to give the matter considered thought, to review these types of articles with TLC and to extract from them the items that do have merit, and with what's left to consider whether a transwiki is a better option than outright deletion from the world wide web. The greatest weakness of wikipedia is the lack of respect that some members of the community have for the hard work of others, and an inability to see - or even to seek - the diamonds in the rough. AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Request to closing admin if this closes as a delete would you, instead, move it (protected if you feel it necessary) to a sub-page of User:AndyJones? AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (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.