Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mass in mode 2 (anonymous)


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Mass in mode 2 (anonymous)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Always (even in the very first revision; here) failed WP:V. (the works listed in "further readings" mostly seem to be general works about Gregorian chant). Unclear exactly what this is referring to. Information about the propers for Easter should instead be included in the article about it (where there is strikingly little about Liturgical observance...). If this is instead only about this particular gradual (Haec dies quam fecit Dominus - which is still part of modern compilations; for eg. here vol 2. p 004-005 ) then, in addition to the completely wrong title - should be smthg. like "Haec dies quam fecit Dominus (gradual)", it might be better to cover this as a representative example on the article about graduals. I'll also note that we don't seem to have much other articles about particular gregorian chants; except maybe when they've had the fortune of being reworked into English by the likes of J. M. Neale or others (and thus gained significant exposure, which this doesn't seem to have). A look through places like JSTOR or Google scholar doesn't seem to yield much academic literature either. Except for the article from a Festschrift given in the further readings ("Die Ostergradualien Haec dies und ihr Verhaltnis zu den Tractus des II. und VIII. Tons" [The Easter Gradual Haec dies and its relationship to the tracts of the 2nd and 8th tones]), most of it seems to be relatively trivial mentions, or discussions as parts of analysis of other musical compositions.

If the above is a long wall of incomprehensible jargon, then I'll summarise: this is just one short piece of Gregorian chant, which isn't independently notable from the rest of the music for Easter, and which does not seem to meet GNG - in short an example also of WP:ITSOLD, as despite its age (in all probability, at least a millenium), it hasn't attracted much coverage.. That, and the article in its current state fails WP:V and it is unlikely that will change. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 05:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per the above. Despite being around for about 7 years, it's an WP:ORPHAN, so it's not going to be missed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:46, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:43, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:43, 16 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as mentioned above, the article has a daily average of 4 pageviews due to it being an orphan and overall lacking general notability (unlikely to change). - 𓋹 𝓩𝓲𝓪𝓭 𝓡𝓪𝓼𝓱𝓪𝓭 𓋹 [user |  talk] 12:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable enough to include in Wikipedia. Setreis (talk) 14:00, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete -- This has the feel of an article on the Catholic mass that someone started writing and never finished, concentrating on producing a bibliography to support what he intended to write. We have some content on the gradual (but mostly a link to an article on that) but nothing at all on the rest of the mass.  The only answer to this is TNT.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2021 (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.