Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Signa (opera)

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. Arkyan • (talk) 20:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signa (opera)

Signa (opera) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Original research per author's own edit log bd_ 17:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete What is this supposed to be exactly? Does this opera exist? If so, the notability is not asserted. The creator states that the text is based on his own original research. Leebo T/C 17:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep I guess I was just thrown off by the non-standard format of the article. It's not written in a way one would expect about a work of fiction. It needs to be rewritten with attention to our Manual of Style, but the opera itself is not eligible for deletion simply because he worked on it as his thesis. The original research needs to be purged, that's all. Leebo T/C 17:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - the author appears to be one of few authorities on the subject matter, but I see no reason for that to mean not merit inclusion. - Tiswas(t/c) 17:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • comment notwithstanding the article (and others) need to be purged of the OR, opinionating and non-encyclopaedic parts - Tiswas(t/c) 17:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • comment I am the author of this article, parkermusic, Christopher J. Parker -- Further to the various observations above, I have now taken on board the comments made. I have explained elsewhere in talk pages that I have inadvertently, through my profile, given the impression that the articles I have written and amended are based on 'original' research, when in reality they are simply the collation of materials already in the public domain or available for public inspection. Yes, they were complied as part of the process of writing my Ph.D, but they are not in themselves original statements by me. There is nothing that is anything other than factual or that has not been observed in a number of different sources. I have clarified all the articles I have written by means of additional sources in the reference sections, and I have deleted the plots of the operas to bring them in line with wikipedia requirements. I hope this is sufficient to preserve the remainder of that which I have contributed in good faith. Christopher J. Parker 14:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - Kleinzach 01:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - clearly verifiable, the sort of thing that Wikipedia is all about. Bob talk 21:52, 15 April 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.