Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Numbers in Egyptian Mythology


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. -Splash talk 23:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Numbers in Egyptian Mythology

 * del original research in numerology. Verifiability. mikka (t) 05:48, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I disagree that this is should be deleted as "original research," it is more likely "source-based research." Based on my memory of Egyptian mythology (admittedly, my memory is based on an history class taken three years ago for fun) most of the numbers listed in the article are "verifiable" with reference to the myths (though some of them are rather obscure).  I'd tag with "cleanup" and "needs references" instead and let it go at that.  Crypticfirefly 06:03, 27 September 2005 (UTC)  Okay, I'm changing my vote to weak keep because it is going to be a pain in the tuchis to figure out what was referred to in order to put in some of the references necessary to clean this thing up.  It looks like most of the information came from Egyptian Myth and Legend, by Donald Mackenzie, published in 1907.  Armed with this information, it should be possible, if tedious, to find each reference.  Crypticfirefly 04:41, 28 September 2005 (UTC)  Okay, I see that someone who doesn't understand how to use the reference tag put in the other references.  I have fixed this so the references make sense.  A good start, though it would be nice if they cited something other than various websites. Crypticfirefly 02:34, 29 September 2005 (UTC)  Changing vote back to Keep, I've found a print reference that supports some of the choices here (and added one cite to it already).  It appears that this article is not "original research," though it has done a poor job of identifying its sources. Crypticfirefly 05:03, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless it can be verified. Owen&times; &#9742;  18:19, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree this article is terrible as it stands, but the topic is inherently valuable. This should be cleaned up, not deleted. Dottore So 19:45, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * . Original research is usually not cleanupable. It is deletable and rewritable from scrathchabe. If you know a way to do in a sourced way and all, by all means welcome. I have no reasons to believe the author in each and every entry. Too much bullshit is known to be slipped by zealous numerologists in between legitimate facts. mikka (t) 20:47, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Most of these would be easy to verify with a good reference book on Egyptian mythology (which I do not have handy). "Cleanup" would do it.
 * References to specific numbers have now been verified.
 * Delete. Without some discussion of why these numbers are important, it's no better an article than List of numbers. --Carnildo 20:42, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, I like List of numbers. Maybe that's what's wrong with me. :-) But seriously, the way this should be handled is to note that certain numbers seem to have a "magical" function in ancient Egyptian myths and folktales. Crypticfirefly 04:43, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * What it should have is which numbers have special meaning, what that meaning is, and research (with cited sources; no original research here) in to why the numbers have what meaning they have, possibly referencing contemporary cultures. What it has is List of occurrences of the number "seven" in Egyptian Mythology, List of occurrences of the number "five" in Egyptian Mythology, List of occurrences of the number "three" in Egyptian Mythology, and a little bit of original-research numerological speculation. --Carnildo 07:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Which is why I tried to remove the numerological speculation.  However, I am now bored with trying to locate the references for the items chosen.  I hope someone does improve it as you describe. Crypticfirefly 01:45, 29 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.