Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peregrine Falcons in popular culture

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. Hemlock Martinis 06:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

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

Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory of unassociated items. None of these things have anything whatsoever to do with each other besides happening to have some reference to a bird. Worthless. Otto4711 01:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per Otto. This is just a worthless list of completely unrelated trivia. fuzzy510 01:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete They should have ethier integrated this in to the Peregrine Falcons or just had delted it in the first place as Trivia sections are not welcomed on Wikipedia. Sawblade05 02:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per loosely associated items Corpx 05:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Punkmorten 08:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Move to talk. A lot of this material doesn't have much to do with the nominal subject of popular culture, even. But the peregrine falcon is an iconic bird with several dimensions in history, folklore, and the arts, and the page about the bird should not neglect these matters. Move this to a subpage of the talk page for the reference of future editors. - Smerdis of Tlön 16:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, culturecruft. Realkyhick 17:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Who cares where peregrin falcans have appeared? - Pheonix 18:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• "I don't care" has been named as a weak argument for deletion, although the list of approved arguments is rather short. Still, there is plenty of stuff here that ought to be taken note of in the article in chief on peregrine falcons: their use as a heraldic symbol, their rank as a kingly gift, and there is moreover more that could be added, like their role in falconry. - Smerdis of Tlön 21:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• There is certainly some scope for limited sections in the main article and the occurrence of the falcon in heraldry, the reasons and the history, might be a good example. However, such sections should be written and sourced from scratch. Keeping what is an uncategorised mess, or even worse, merging in and spoiling a good main article is not the way to go. TerriersFan 22:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Another trivia-filled article.--JForget 00:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Good as IPC articles go, with references not just to film, but to official recognition by organizations as a bird second to the eagle. Mandsford 00:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep or merge to Peregrine Falcon, which is a WP birds collab currently. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep with rename (most contents are not "popular culture") or merge into Peregrine Falcons. In either case, add citations to sources. This is not trivia, but a once-over-lightly treatment of some of the aspects of this bird in history and culture.--orlady 02:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and rename per above. -- Visviva 04:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and rename per above, don't merge. Jimfbleak 07:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, rename, expand, and, source Given the referents in the articles, there will be no problem sourcing them. DGG (talk) 08:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete there are no WP:RSes that the peregrine falcon's place in popular culture is notable. Carlossuarez46 19:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

  really? -- Visviva 21:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• Yes really. A bunch of books that contain the words "peregrine falcon" and "folklore" don't demonstrate that the topic is covered in reliable sources. Unless you're willing to suggest that there's a lot of scholarly research into the relationship between Hitler and Pop-tarts. Otto4711 00:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, rename, expand, and, source as per DGG and orlady. Mathmo ^Talk 21:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, rename, or merge per above. Cheers, Corvus coronoides _{talk 00:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)}
• Keep, merge, expand, and source These are not all items to be just dismissed because they aren't properly expanded and sourced. They should be described and properly cited within Peregrin Falcon Farlox 11:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, squash, stamp on and salt the earth These IPC articles attract trivia like static attracts dust. SilkTork 13:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• 'Delete There's no reason for this sub-article as there's plenty of room on Peregrine Falcon to include truly non-trivial examples from this minimal list of unrelated events that happened to include one or more of these birds. I can envision a real article perhaps being created on Peregrine Falcons in folklore if such information is available and deserves in-depth treatment greater than a few paragraphs in the main article. — Scientizzle 18:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• 'Delete as per nom. Harlowraman 18:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - mostly unsourced it presently fails WP:V since there is no guarantee that sourcing is possible. Further, it is an indiscriminate collection of information. There is no organisation that would make this list valuable and encyclopaedic - collating the appearances of the bird in literature or paintings for example and explaining the significance of each appearance. What this is is an essentially unstructured collection of random occurrences. TerriersFan 22:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Rename remove bullets, source and improve. Popular is a POV. Right now does not cover the great popularity among Arabian Sheikhs for instance. Shyamal 05:29, 14 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.