Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawsuits against the Devil


 * 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. per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure)  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   01:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Lawsuits against the Devil

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not warrant its own page. Article does not cover the overall subject, just two instances. Fails WP:IINFO. Mr. Guye (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. This doesn't seem to be a thing, as searches for the article's title, as well as other, similar phrases turn up nothing except for mirrors of this article and information on the movie that is mentioned.  One silly court case, which was thrown out, and one minor movie on the subject do not make this a notable topic, and there seems to be no scholarly sources on the topic.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - This appears to be a form from Lawsuits against God, and has been extant for eight years. Perhaps it should be merged back, or into some Lawsuits against supernatural beings? -mattbuck (Talk) 22:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment - I agree with mattbuck, the two pages could be combined, especially as the first listed lawsuit against God sounds more like a suit against the devil. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed with the above, this should be merged somewhere appropriate, but there's not enough here for its own article. Jclemens (talk) 02:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A major theme in Western literature.  certainly keep, just needs improvement. I did a small expand, source.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2017 (UTC) independent of
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep -- The fictional content is significant enough to keep. The one actual attempt failed because the proceedings could not be served, but it is worth noting.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per above comments. Aoba47 (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per above comments. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 08:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep we studied United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff in civil procedure in law school. The fictional works that include law suits against the devil are also notable. This is a valid list article although not formatted as such. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 18:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep we talked about this in one of my legal classes. It's a real issue for standing.  Although my favorite still has to be the Motion to Kiss My ***, and the lawsuit written on toilet paper.    --David Tornheim (talk) 00:19, 25 April 2017 (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.