Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural depictions of Margaret Thatcher


 * 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. Rlendog (talk) 14:34, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Margaret Thatcher

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is article is completely pointless. It is poorly written and has virtually no references or citations and hasn't done since August 2011. I feel there is no justification for keeping this article and it needs to be deleted. The list of songs for example is nothing but pure opinion/OR/POV Christian1985 (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 03:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


 *  Weak Keep. It's pretty hopeless at the moment but it isn't hard to find sources that could be used (e.g. Google News). A lot of the songs that the nominator removed could be sourced. There are songs that are pretty obviously about Thatcher, e.g. Notsensibles' "I'm in Love with Margaret Thatcher", Atilla the Stockbroker's "Maggots 1, Maggie 0", Pete Wylie's "The Day that Margaret Thatcher Dies", Hefner's "The Day That Thatcher Dies", Frank Turner's "Thatcher Fucked the Kids", The Beat's "Stand Down Margaret", etc., etc. There's definitely an article to be written here even if what we have at the moment isn't it. --Michig (talk) 06:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually there are lots of sources that could be used here. Keep and improve.--Michig (talk) 06:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree, I think this "article" is completely pointless and at most it should be a properly referenced section in the Margaret Thatcher article. This "article" on its own is a shambolic unreferenced list. Christian1985 (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It isn't unreferenced. A little effort in adding references and very little of it would be unreferenced.--Michig (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, submitters argument sounds like wp:idontlikeit. It is referenced, albeit poorly, and bad writing is not a reason for deletion. Greglocock (talk) 00:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep - the criterion for keeping any article isn't whether the article is currently well sourced, but whether it could be - to which the answer is resoundingly Yes, there are thousands of reliable sources out there. As for this list, firstly the criterion - is something a cultural depiction of the iron lady - is crisply defined; secondly, there are certainly many major works including films, dramas and satires about her, as the forest of bluelinks proves. And finally, there are already some RS in the article. No doubt the article can be improved with more citations, but as regards keeping, there's no case to answer. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The article's not for deleting. The nominator hasn't really given a good reason for deleting, just for cleanup. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:59, 3 April 2012 (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.