Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L'albatros (poem)


 * 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. bd2412 T 03:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

L'albatros (poem)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

move to wikisource. Viztor (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * If you had properly followed WP:BEFORE, you would have noticed there is 1910 results on google scholar, including . Comte0 (talk) 20:26, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Viztor (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Viztor (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Les Fleurs du mal, which the poem is apparently a part of, unless standalone notability of this poem can be established. Also fine with it being added to Wikisource, as it appears to be public domain based on the age. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  15:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep The French article has several secondary sources. It also has context and analysis sections, which must be translated and are obviously not suited for wikibooks. And that poem is studied in French high schools. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 20:31, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * In the page's current state it should be moved to Wikisource as it basicly just the poem itself, but I do believe an article can be created about this poem, so I would say Move to Wikisource, and then create a stub or translation of the French article. funplussmart (talk) 23:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * BTW, it's already present twice on the french wikisource. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 11:27, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep It's no great shakes in its current state but its place in national French education curriculum alone suggests notability. This is only furthered by the sourcing present in the French article. This article could be expanded into meaningful and useful encyclopedic content and as such should not be moved to a sister project at the expense of an article here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:18, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * CommentThis page as of now is obvious only suitable for Wikisource, if you think it should be kept, well, then rewrite it. If someone else is interested to write an actual introduction about the poem, they can still create it. Viztor (talk) 07:13, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Nom does not provide a single policy-based argument for why this article is brought to AFD. Sam Sailor 07:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not Wikisource, the current content is obviously more suitable for Wikisource. Viztor (talk) 09:26, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * That's still not a policy-based reason, it's mere opinion. Sam Sailor 10:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lead now re-written and referenced, there are virtually 100s of sources to pick from, a full treatment by Antonio Prete. The French article can readily by used for expansion. It is a waste of community time to skip WP:BEFORE. Sam Sailor 10:04, 10 June 2019 (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.