Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred cockfight


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Sacred cockfight

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fundamentally, this entire article is a novel synthesis created in furtherance of a fringe religious viewpoint and, at best, serves as a POV fork of cockfight. This article appears well-referenced, but very few of the connections that it makes are supported in sources. Scholars (and, indeed, reliable sources in general) do not draw a sacred/secular divide regarding cockfighting. Nor are the broad themes described here recognized. An example of the novel synthesis present here is its treatment of alectryomancy (divination with roosters). Reliable sources describe various methods of rooster divination based on the bird (or birds) pecking at grain. The author of this material cites a single 1816 dictionary entry that also defines alectryomancy as "cock-fighting" to syncretize religious uses of alectryomancy with cockfighting absent any sources that actually make those claims.

Relying on Google hits is of course bad form, but it's probably worth note that there are zero relevant Google Books hits for "sacred cockfight" and zero reliable Google Scholar hits for "sacred cockfight". This topic simply does not have the recognition and coverage that the use of references here implies. A little more information about the motivation at play here can be seen at the AFD for Agonist (Christian). All of this is intended to support the fringe religious viewpoints of www.christian-agonist.com and agon.us. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  16:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. I have not read it all, but did look into the claimed citation from Augustine, and disputed that on the talk page. The section on Judaism and Christianity is rambling, confusing, and seems to be piling together any possible citations touching on the subject, despite non-sequiturs and irrelevance, to give a superficial appearance of scholarly writing. The paragraphs that currently start "The Talmud" and "The Vatican Persian cock" read like drivel, and are an insult to Wikipedia, not to mention Judaism and Christianity. It might be possible to rescue this page e.g. as Roosters in religion, like some other members of Category:Animals in religion, but it would have to be very different from what it is now. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:08, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I am quite familiar with the passage of the Talmud cited there, and I cannot make any sense of the intended meaning in the article. Ratzd&#39;mishukribo (talk) 23:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete I believe editor All Worlds has good intentions and he has cleaned up some vandalism in unrrelated articles. However, he seems to have difficulty writing legible prose. He also draws peculiar conclusions regarding cockfighting and religion in general, and from what I can tell has hijacked all articles regarding cockfighting to draw attention to his odd POV. I have cleaned up much of this material recently. Niado (talk) 17:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete May be good intentions, but it is just so much original research and synthesis. Let's wait for some academic reliable sources to write articles that are focused on this very specific subject first, before it's synthesized here. First Light (talk) 19:41, 15 November 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.