Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/May you live in interesting times


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

May you live in interesting times

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This doesn't seem notable. It's been used a couple of times (although many of the uses in the "Popularization and usage" are original research/jumping to conclusions), but plenty of other sayings have been used a couple of times and don't have articles. I'm just not seeing the coverage that would make this notable.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  06:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The phrase has been used far more than a "couple" of times, and the phrase, especially as a topic associated with Robert F. Kennedy, has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources for many years. Please feel free to write articles about other notable phrases, but the lack of those articles so far is not a good argument for deleting this article.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  06:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. The speech is notable, and discussion of the phrase within the context of the speech is perfectly acceptable. However being used in a notable speech doesn't serve as the basis for an article. The object of commentary, ultimately, is the speech.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  07:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem with your response is that, even though RFK popularized the phrase, it predates his usage, it has often been used with no reference to him, and the phrase and its problematic origins have been discussed completely outside the context of its usage in an RFK speech given in South Africa. As a matter of fact, when the phrase is discussed and analyzed, the broader content of that specific speech is rarely discussed. That's why the phrase is independently notable, because the phrase itself is so often the primary subject of the coverage, not the speech and not RFK.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  07:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Widely used enough to be notable and I hadn't realised the connection with RFK. It's no "Ich Bin Ein Berlinner"  Neonchameleon (talk) 17:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per Cullen328. Enough sources and substantive discussion to be worthy of an article. --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep This does seem notable. Warden (talk) 23:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - I must say I am puzzled why this would be considered for deletion. Reasonable sourcing and decent article structure are evident, and deleting the article does not improve the encyclopedia. Jus  da  fax   10:14, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sourcing is there that proves it exists. Sourcing is not there that discusses it in critical detail.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  19:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I feel the article talk page shows that there is, and that the article could be improved further from where it is now. Consensus clearly exists to keep: I respectfully suggest we close. Jus  da  fax   22:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Go ahead.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  23:01, 6 December 2013 (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.