Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modern 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 Delete I've initially put the redirect to modernist party but changed but I think it should be redirect at least somewhere as suggested in the AFD. Both of the ideas suggested seems to be good though but I will an editor to create the appropriate redirect link. --JForget 00:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Modern poetry
"These poetic writing techniques were devised by Khanh C. Du" in an article created by user:Kennethdu1. Pure original research. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete and redirect to modernist poetry. --Dhartung | Talk 08:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete and redirect vain vanity in vain. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete and redirect All is vanity. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Pure OR. I don't think that a redirect to modernist poetry is appropriate. Modernist poetry is a technical term that refers to a specific literary movement in early 20th century. "Modern poetry" is a colloquial term that refers to contemporary or recently written poetry of any kind. I think a redirect would actually be misleading here. Nsk92 (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Comment I considered that (and I'm a Comp. Lit. minor with some poetry under my own belt), but we really don't have an appropriate article like that. The timeline of poetry articles are in pretty sorry shape, little more than navigation bingo boxes. Formal sources tend to eschew terms like "modern poetry" nowadays because the term has become so associated with the period of modernism. --Dhartung | Talk 21:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete.
- Vociferous tachometer
- Splice verses of valor
- Zealous uplifters
- Icy thunder-shower does tinder yonder
- My god, we have a new McGonagall among us! Quaere, do we have an article on contemporary poetry? (Guess not) If so, disambiguation might be the best thing here. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- That wasn't doggerel-like enough to be McGonagall. More like Ted Hughes. All this and no formal training?:) Do you think he will be headhunted by a prestigious publishing company, such as lulu? Merkin's mum 20:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect to history of poetry. That article's section on "Modern developments" is not very good, but it seems a more appropriate target than modernist poetry. EALacey (talk) 23:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Strong delete with no redirect. Original research, nonsense, and blatant self-advertising. Note the article's creator is User:Kennethdu1. Khanh C. Du (the 'poet' in this artcle) is Kenneth Khanh Du. The article here is a verbatim copy from Kenneth Khanh Du's entry at ifp.org The other WP article by User:Kennethdu1, which was speedily deleted as "patent nonsense" (and rightly so) was Composite scena, another 'brainchild' of Kenneth Khanh Du (aka Khanh C. Du). See his other entry at ifp.org. Voceditenore (talk) 08:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- Further note: His CV on ifp.org is here. There's a list of his other 'products' on offer (some of which are quite disturbing) here. (Click on the links). Be prepared for related articles possibly appearing on WP.Voceditenore (talk) 08:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
strong delete rather than redirect. This is about the article author's stuff which is non-notable. Merkin's mum 20:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete "I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by / madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the AfD discussions of non-notable articles / looking for an angry fix..." Ecoleetage (talk) 02:28, 13 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.
