Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M. C. Escher 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 keep, per consensus. Non-admin closure. The Evil Spartan (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

M. C. Escher in popular culture

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Virtually the entirety of this article is unreferenced original research. Most of the entries consist simply of constructs that various Wikipedia editors thought looked like something out of one of Escher's paintings. No reliable third-party sources are cited to substantiate these assertions. *** Crotalus *** 11:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I suppose that this is overflow from the Escher article. The article needs work but there is something to be said here, because Escher was so influential.  I have an Escher tie myself and it is one of my favourites.  The article doesn't even mention this yet.  Colonel Warden (talk) 11:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem is that you can't simply assume that every depiction of an impossible object or similar geometry is related to M.C. Escher. That is original research. You need a reliable source specifically saying that it was Escher-inspired. *** Crotalus *** 11:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Wikipedia's "In popular culture" category articles constitutes the world's single most useful Popular Culture Encyclopedia and every year it gets better. Help that effort to make it an even better pop culture encyclopedia within the vast Wikipedia encyclopedia that contains all other encyclopedias. Don't try to destroy it. I suppose if you were editing Wikipedia in 2003, you would have put up the whole encyclopedia for deletion because at that time no article on Wikipedia was adequately sourced by today's standards. We don't delete an article just because it is not yet perfect. Further your assertion are incorrect. You appear not to even have read the article nor to have read its many external links. WAS 4.250 (talk) 11:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The external links are to Youtube, IMDB, and blogs &mdash; none of which are reliable sources. *** Crotalus *** 13:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  12:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Like American Gothic, Escher's engraving of Relativity (M. C. Escher) (the one where people are climbing staircases at various angles) has become famous enough that it is parodied, referred to, and universally recognized.  Mandsford (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this well-organized and referenced article. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep While some of these "inspired by Escher" claims may be subject to questioning, it's clear that the vast majority are actually references to Escher, since they use identical motifs. Also, in this case, they are also not "unreferenced", because they draw their information from the primary source. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 17:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Clearly notable, but better sources can be found. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 18:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - common sense says notable and references shouldn't bee too hard. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very notable and influential artist. As with the Illuminati article above, vet any unverifiable information or OR, and keep the rest. 23skidoo (talk) 00:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Fairly well sourced already.DGG (talk) 01:33, 16 January 2008 (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.