Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anthropomorphic personifications


 * 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   Delete - as noted below, criteria for inclusion in the list is subjective and loose to the point of original research. However, it appears to have been created by an IP in 2005. If anyone would like this userfied please just leave me a message on my talk page. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:44, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

List of anthropomorphic personifications

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Completing nomination for IP User:173.181.114.103. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 18:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The original nomination, as per Talk:List of anthropomorphic personifications, reads thus (formatting my own, the bold text was originally a heading): "Delete, overcategorization: Personification of concepts is a way too broad list, we'd have to include several if notable." UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 18:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Fork: This list is too long, but it is about notable things (and things that aren't notable shouldn't be on the list, since the criteria should exclude non-notable entries). So figure out an acceptable set of sub-lists to fork this into. - Jorgath (talk) (contribs) 17:29, 1 May 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) 00:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep (with changes) It's a reasonable list in theory, but it mixes things that are actual personifications (e.g. Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse) with things that are commonly personified (e.g. destiny). It should settle on one or the other. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:33, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, but limit to things that are personifications, rather than to concepts that are commonly personified, as suggested by Colapeninsula. To put it another way: the personification itself must have its own article. (Also remove deities, eg. Tyche, Lakshmi; Fortuna seems like it should stay though.) –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 17:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. The inclusion criterion is unclear beyond repair. The listed entries have very different, often culture dependent, statuses of personification. Bringing these entries together in an article is essentially original research. What is Europa doing on this list? She is the personification of what? And the Tooth Fairy? Why not the Wicked Witch of the West? Ultimately, the selection will be based on subjective criteria. After, all, why are mountains, clouds, the Sea (and so on and so on) not included? --Lambiam 23:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - an interesting list, but perhaps it needs a lot more work than anyone can deal with right now. Userfy? Bearian (talk) 17:43, 15 May 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.