Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mneseus

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 No Consensus. Both Keep and Delete voters seemed to have worthy arguments. Surely better sources could be found; one senses that more has been written about this guy. Merging is an editorial decision, and is still possible. The article that the voters have decided to keep is not very impressive. EdJohnston (talk) 03:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mneseus

Mneseus (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Mneseus is one of 10 twins in Plato's Critias - all we can say about him is his name and position in the 'family', basically just a definition Doug Weller (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

CommentI probably should have added this this is a contest PROD, contested on the grounds 'it's fracking Plato'. I don't think that's a good enough reason for such a non-notable fictional character.--Doug Weller (talk) 16:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Merge: to Critias. "It's fracking Plato" is not, as far as I recognize, explicitly part of Wikipedia policy or guideline.  RGTraynor  20:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
• Tentative keep. Critias (dialogue) would require a new section for minor characters. These authors speculate that Mneseus was the third king of Atlantis. If it's the same Mneseus. I would suggest asking Classical Greece and Rome to comment.Trachys (talk) 02:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Professor Schoppe teaches economics and write about Atlantis which they locate in the Black Sea. In this instance, he isn't a reliable source and we couldn't use him in the article. That is just speculation, there is only the one mention of the name in classical writings.--Doug Weller (talk) 07:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

next to the Black Sea, not in the sea, iirc. Does anyone have access to Schoppe's sources? Trachys (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment: And there's no there there. If merging this to Critias means making a minor character section, well, then, why exactly not? The Critias article isn't precisely overlarge.  RGTraynor  19:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• Keep all figures from classical mythology are notable. These are the sort of subject people come to an encyclopedia to find out about. Whatever there is to say, we should say. (there's an article also in GS from Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 1943. [1] ) DGG (talk) 04:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Mneseus is not a figure in classical mythology, the only mention of his name is the very brief mention by Plato which is not part of classical mythology. He is included in the article by Pease only in his long list of 'offspring of Posidon', referenced to Critias.--Doug Weller (talk) 07:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

classical mythology is the mythological figures referred to by classical authors.DGG (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but I repeat this is an invention of Plato's, Poseidon is a mythical figure, but Plato made this character up so far as we know.--Doug Weller (talk) 21:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Why did/would Plato invent Mneseus? Even if he did, don't the inventions of one of the greatest minds in history deserve an entry? Trachys (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No more so than any other ephemeral character from any other author's works. We don't have a separate article for every walk-on character in every play of Shakespeare's, come to that.  RGTraynor  13:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete due to lack of sources. Keep only if verified. Stifle (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete From what I can tell, Mneseus is mentioned only once in Critias. I doubt that he is even notable enough to mention in a minor character section of the Critias article, much less have an article of his own.--FreeKresge (talk) 21:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. —Trachys (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per DGG's reasoning. I think there has long been a consensus here at WP that all mythical kings from "The Classics" are per se notable. Plato is a dead white guy, and so was Mneseus; therefore, there will be few Internet sources. Lack of Ghits does not mean the subject is non-notable. Bearian (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment: I'd be pleased if you could link to those consensus discussions; I'd be interested in seeing it for myself.  RGTraynor  14:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment:So would I, but how is it relevant? Critias is an essay by Plato, it is not a myth. Mneseus is a character he created, therefore not mythical. And 'few Internet sources' is a red herring here, we have Google Scholar and Google books, which should be good sources for anything classical.--Doug Weller (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete and merge into Critias (dialogue), if desired. I note that Mneseus isn't even mentioned in the Critias article; how can he be notable enough to have a separate article then ? Autochthon and Cleito aren't mentioned in the Critias article either, and they don't have separate articles. All three are very minor characters in Plato, not notable at all, but perhaps should be mentioned in Critias just for the sake of completeness. Plvekamp (talk) 00:07, 22 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.