Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satyrs 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 \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 05:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Satyrs in popular culture

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Trivial list cruft/clutter at best. Notable entries (if there is any) belong in the main article only. This is an improper article split, that was done with no consensus. RobJ1981 (talk) 04:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * keep or merge agree about split. fictional satyrs are pretty much the same as their Greek antecedents. Plenty of notable modern uses, eg. Fantasia, Mr Tumnus from Narnia books and films. etc. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:37, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing on the list that is potentially significant enough to be in the main article is even referenced so it is nothing more than an unverified list of exiled trivia garbage from the main article. Anything important enough to be in the main article should be discussed, not listed. Drawn Some (talk)


 * Keep/merge This is a merge issue not a cruft issue. The parent article is quite small, send it back and let those knowledgable clean and maintain as needed. Modern examples are certainly something Wikipedia does and should do. This is a part f what seperates us from paper encyclopedias. -- Banj e  b oi   01:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, if this material remains, it will only eventually return to blight another article. Mintrick (talk) 01:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete What separates us from a paper encyclopedia is that we are not bound by space to include encyclopedic material. Uncited factoids of trivia that have only a tangential relation to Satyrs do not a discriminate encyclopedia make.  Them From  Space  01:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Total misconception of what it means to be an encyclopedia. The use of a notable theme in notable works is an encyclopedic topic. The level of what gets included in an encyclopedia is always subject to both practical considerations and quality--we have no practical size limitation,ouronly limitation is edits willing to work on material, and quality implies that we do not eliminate popular culture or any other important subject. Some people interpret it the other way, of course, but they don't seem to understand that we are a contemporary encyclopedia.DGG (talk) 02:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep As I said elsewhere for this sort of thing, showing how a fictional creature created thousands of years ago, keeps appearing in popular culture over the years, is clearly notable.  D r e a m Focus  02:27, 9 June 2009 (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.