Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Platonic Lovers

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, already moved per consensus. Arkyan • (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Platonic Lovers

Platonic Lovers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Was listed as a candidate for speedy deletion. I feel that it is not a CSD candidate as there is sufficient context for an article (lack of content in itself is not an indicator of CSD). Also, I don't know if the play is notable enough to be kept, or just another play that someone saw and decided to write an article about. May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 10:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep. A play written in 1636 that's still being put on today, and which (inaccurately, as it turns out) created the term Platonic love, may very well be notable. I'm going to see what I can find about this play and see if I can expand this. Note: Changed vote to Strong Keep - play is on syllabi of courses of at least one major British university (the University of Bristol) and (possibly) Manchester University, and has over a dozen Google Scholar hits. I wish it were available online, though, but it looks like it isn't. --Charlene 11:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment However, the play is not called "Platonic Lovers". It's called "The Platonick Lovers". --Charlene 11:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I listed this for deletion because it doesn't assert significance or importance, and I thought that was one of the sufficient criteria according to WP:CSD. I still think it should be deleted; it's very unremarkable. 76.178.95.219 11:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment I think it's quite remarkable; it's just not known to modern audiences. One interesting thing I've just found is that it's being taught at a major university, and is often referred to in books when discussing the pre-Civil War court of Charles I's wife. Apparently it has both historical and cultural significance. I'm going to have to take a trudge to the university library to pick up one of the 5 books directly about this play or the 74 others that refer to it extensively. --Charlene 11:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Charlene above, plus the fact that it's still in print 400 years later implies importance within the field. I agree the article needs to be better sourced and referenced, and possibly moved-and-redirected to "The Platonick Lovers" if that was the title used. - Iridescenti (talk to me!) 12:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Move to The Platonick Lovers. Davenant was a notable writer and it's possible to have an article on this play - but please somebody add some more information to this feeble stub. Somebody already has- great! A definite keep then, but re-title it. --Folantin 13:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Moved, and keep - seems entirely remarkable and is certainly by a remarkable playwright. Looks like there are sources available. Moreschi Request a recording? 15:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and retitle, as mentioned. JavaTenor 19:35, 25 March 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.