Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pompeia Paulina

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. Black Kite 02:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pompeia Paulina

Pompeia Paulina (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I suggest that we delete this page because it simply repeats information available on the seneca the younger page. The statement that Paulina would have wanted to commit suicide because she was Seneca's wife is laughable and pure speculation. The only information we have is that given in Tacitus and it is poor historiography to imagine you can construct anything detailed about the actual events described. You cant write biographies on the basis of references in ancient authors as if you were writing modern biography. Seneca_2007 (talk) 00:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Historical figure. Has been discussed in some of the 100s of books written about the period. The source for the contention, obviously, obviously, is Tacitus & the secondary sources given. sourcing is sufficient for notability. DGG (talk) 05:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could explain what else you plan to add to this page? What is here simply repeats what is on the seneca the younger page. Perhaps you could explain and cite the discussions of her "in some of the 100s of books written about the period". I think you will find the discussion of her in the scholarly literature exiguous. She may be mentioned in several books but it is only in connection with seneca's death. Seneca_2007 (talk) 22:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Keep Subject is covered in one of the few primary sources of the period and article includes several secondary sources. Just because the nominator thinks the article needs to be expanded but cannot is not grounds for deletion. The statement that Paulina would have wanted to commit suicide because she was Seneca's wife might be laughable, but it does not occur in the article which says she chose to attempt suicide because her husband had been ordered to do so. And when an Emperor intervenes to stop a suicide, that's an excellent indication the person is notable. Edward321 (talk) 16:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The article says "As Pompeia was wife of Seneca, Nero's tutor, it would be expected that she also wanted to die,". So yes the article does make the laughable suggestion. Who says it would be expected. Tacitus doesnt. This is just another example of sloppy work. Why dont we have pages and pages of wikepedia entries of all the people who are mentioned in Tacitus for whom there is no other information. Perhaps that could be a new project for someone who thinks that this sort of entry is useful. But no-one sems bothered by the fact that the information on this page repeats what is on the seneca page. Anyone clicking the link on paulina will simply find exactly the same information that they have already read. Seneca_2007 (talk) 00:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - Also Giovanni Boccaccio has written about her in On Famous Women. Possible speculation and sloppy work need to be addressed on the editorial level as duplication of content (which would leave a redirect at the very minimum, but I don't think this is the case here.)--Tikiwont (talk) 12:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you prepared to do the work? Do you know anything about Roman History. The page on Boccaccio's famous women does little morer than list the women he wrote about. It is nothing more than a list and another poor piece of work.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Seneca 2007 (talk • contribs)

• Keep - Subject is well referenced with excellent primary and secondary sources. --Doug ^talk 13:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The page is not well referenced with excellent primary and secondary sources. Only one of the links for the secondary sources works and it does not offer any discussion it simply paraphrases Tacitus. I dont think you can have looked the references up.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Seneca 2007 (talk • contribs)

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.