Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Napoleon 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 Keep. Non admin closure. The Sunshine Man 17:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Napoleon in popular culture
List of unreferenced trivial mentions of Napoleon's portrayals in fiction. Adds nothing to the reader's understanding of society's perspective on Napoleon. --Eyrian 20:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Weak keep Unless we're going to slash and burn all the articles in Category:Representations of people in popular culture, this one's okay. YechielMan 22:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- (non)Existence of other articles shouldn't affect whether a particular article is kept or deleted. --Eyrian 22:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Existence of classes of articles indicates a practice, however. Make a mass deletion nomination if you like; but tag them all if you do. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Except that this class of article frequently gets deleted. They keep crawling back because people don't like removing good-faith additions, and tend to look the other way. --Eyrian 01:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Existence of classes of articles indicates a practice, however. Make a mass deletion nomination if you like; but tag them all if you do. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- (non)Existence of other articles shouldn't affect whether a particular article is kept or deleted. --Eyrian 22:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Most of these are referenced in text (would adding René Goscinny, Asterix and the Big Fight in a footnote to the relevant paragraph really help anybody?). We may not need a list of the works in which Napoleon himself appears; although better here than Napoleon I of France (where's War and Peace?) But the list of the Napoleonic complexes is interesting and would be difficult to have any other way. Trim. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - unless a major reconstruction is undertaken before the end of the AFD to make this article more closely resemble Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc and not just be a mass of every time the name "Napoleon" is mentioned or there's a charcter called "Napoleon" by someone or named Napoleon but otherwise unrelated to the historical figure. Otto4711 23:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep One of the most influential people in history! Mind boggling that it is even nominated. --140.254.225.30 23:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment - the notability of the subject of the article is not in question in this nomination. It is the suitability of the pop culture article that is under discussion, not the suitability of Napoleon. Otto4711 00:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep there's notable and there's iconic; Napoleon is the latter and how popular culture reflects that is encyclopedic. Carlossuarez46 23:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Neutral - I think a good article can be written about this; but this isn't in -- it's just a bag of trivia about where Napoleon has been referred to or mentioned. If it's kept, clean-up the article, and if it hangs around and still isn't cleaned-up in a couple of months, we can trash it. --Haemo 23:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per existing arguments... Ranma9617 02:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - Regrettably these "popular culture" articles are necessary, because the public like adding every allusion they find to a subject (however non-encyclopaedic) to articles. This is a consequence of the open-editing policy of WP. Having articles of this kind provides a suitable receptical for this kind of thing. If there was no "populkar culture" article, the main article on Napoleon would become overloaded with a mass of passing allusions. Peterkingiron 11:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- Better here than in the main article is a poor argument for keeping an article. The proper response to junk information in the main article is to delete it, not to spin it off and make it someone else's problem. Otto4711 13:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep the article is pretty poor at the moment, but the subject has massive potential. Johnbod 11:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. This needs editing and some paring, but the basic structure for arranging these allusions thematically is already there. It definitely needs to be expanded with references to other appearances of Napoleon in fictions that no longer count as "popular culture", such as War and Peace. Indeed, Napoleon's absence in the works of Jane Austen probably merits a paragraph. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please tell me this is a joke. You're suggesting that the absence of Napoleon from works of fiction is justification for a list of the times he does appear? Otto4711 06:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's an example of knowing something about the subject. The fact that Austen doesn't mention Napoleon, although writing during the wars, is repeatedly mentioned in writing on her, and her period. Tolstoy would be a useful contrast; see, for example, this article ("Jane Austen: In Search of Time Present" by Julia Prewitt Brown; Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal, Vol. 22, 2000) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Beautiful. So not only should we have Napoleon in popular culture, we should have Lack of Napoleon in popular culture. That would no doubt be a simply super article. Otto4711 07:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's an example of knowing something about the subject. The fact that Austen doesn't mention Napoleon, although writing during the wars, is repeatedly mentioned in writing on her, and her period. Tolstoy would be a useful contrast; see, for example, this article ("Jane Austen: In Search of Time Present" by Julia Prewitt Brown; Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal, Vol. 22, 2000) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please tell me this is a joke. You're suggesting that the absence of Napoleon from works of fiction is justification for a list of the times he does appear? Otto4711 06:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete because this is clearly a list of indiscriminate trivia in disguise. This is essentially a directory because #1 states that entries that are not made famous due to the association with this figure. Furthermore, per WP:NOTE, if one wanted to write about Napoleon in an encyclopedic context, it would involved citing attributable sources that provide significant coverage about the figure in popular culture. Personally throwing together details that are indiscriminate in nature is a synthesis of the so-called argument for Napoleon's impact in popular culture. This isn't a logical 1+1=2 argument -- we the editors do not judge a figure's lasting prominence by saying, "Napoleon was mentioned in a Seinfeld episode!" As editors, we are not supposed to be the original presenters of a topic using indiscriminate details that mean nothing when they stand alone. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep, for all the reasons previously listed by other keepers.74.133.188.197 20:40, 25 June 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.
