Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glastonbury Tor in popular culture


 * 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   merge to Glastonbury Tor. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 12:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Glastonbury Tor in popular culture

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Trivial listcruft that shows no signs of notability. If there is any important ones, they belong in a small section in the main article only. RobJ1981 (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. As per nom, any referenced material can be moved to Glastonbury Tor, and this article can be deleted as an unlikely search term. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge - the information should be added to the bottom of the main Glastonbury Tor article. One big one that is left out is that almost every documentary and recording from the amazing Glastonbury Festival tends to have more than a few helicopter shots of the Tor. :-)Tris2000 (talk) 15:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge back - the creator of this article dislikes pop culture material, and has hit upon the strategy of splitting that material out of articles, in the hope that the standalone pop culture articles would be deleted as non-notable. Let's not reward that kind of bullshit. Hesperian 01:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge back ridiculous waste of time with bad-faith split. I love pop culture stuff and would have rather the unreferenced material just removed and we could add back once sourced. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge back Unnecessary split, articles like this should not be created until there a good twenty or so significant entries. This will likely never achieve this, and even back in the main article it could be chopped down. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 02:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Trivial listcruft has no place in a Wikipedia article. Why? It adds nothing to the reader's understanding of the subject, which is the sole purpose of an article. Glastonbury Tor does figure in popular culture, however.--Wetman (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as an unlikely search term. The subject deserves a mention in the main article, but what is here is unsourced and appears to be original research, so it isn't very encyclopedic.  Them  From  Space  22:37, 9 September 2009 (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.