Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonnet 115

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. Sr13 03:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonnet 115

Sonnet 115 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

One of a large set of mini-articles. I listed it for speedy deletion under db-context since there is no explanation as to who wrote the sonnet and even what a sonnet is. I have since been told that not only does this not need to be done, since it is one of a set of presumably similar articles, but the Original Research interpretation and lack of sources is not a problem. This may require further AfDs to the entire set. Corvus cornix 20:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


  • Keep, but with clean-up --Onceonthisisland 20:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless this gets seriously re-written. The synopsis is completely original research, and lists no reliable sources for an analysis of the poem. I just added a short lead, but it's incredibly basic and also needs more expansion. The article is more or less a plot summary, which violates WP:NOT. Hersfold (talk/work) 21:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - sufficient references available Addhoc 21:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep Part of a set of articles on Shakespeare's sonnets, all of which merit individual articles. Golfcam 23:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep Well, notability is not inherited, so I almost went delete, but I'm sure with enough searching, we could find the proper coverage to confer notability for the particular sonnet, and this run on sentence is giving me a headache, but I'm in a very weird mood and at least I'm only doing it on a talk page, so I'm going to go ahead and go with keep, unless we can come up with a strong reason to delete it (instead of, say .. fixing it). Spazure 04:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Get thee to a library! There has been an enormous amount of critical commentary on every word Shakespeare ever wrote. I'd be extremely surprised if this sonnet is an exception. Zagalejo 04:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. I doubt there's a Shakespearian sonnet that isn't notable. (Someone's trying to Kill Bill. Don't Mess With Bill.) Clarityfiend 06:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Zagalejo spazure (contribs) 09:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep Laughable this was even nominated for deletion. Seems the article was just added the day before, too. - Cyborg Ninja 14:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable subject, just needs some time to grow (more than 24 hours)--Entoaggie09 22:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep, the subject is clearly notable an merits encyclopedic coverage. Burntsauce 17:41, 31 July 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.