Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sirens 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 no consensus for deletion. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Sirens in popular culture

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Trivial collection, unacceptable per WP:FIVE ("Wikipedia is not a trivia collection"), and WP:NOT. Eyrian 16:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  J- stan  Talk Contribs 17:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per nomination. To be honest I started out on Wikipedia by editing this page and cleaning it up when it was a lot smaller - back then it had some use as a reference point - many readers failing to appreciate the connection between the classical sirens and teh numerous references in popular culture. There's a tendency for folks just to stick any old nonsense on there now (e.g. the woeful song lyric section) and it's unwieldy now. The only problem is, if you take it out, the main Sirens article and the dab page will probably suffer without strong-handed editing.Dick G 00:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I now watch both, so rest easy. --Eyrian 00:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Having re-read it just now, it's clearly a list of trivial references - and any actual Siren references are picked up in the dab. Delete away Dick G 00:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 21:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment hard to vote keep when even the article creator hates this one. The legend of the Sirens (which is only a small part of the Odyssey) has certainly had an influence on popular culture, but it's on the wane-- most people think emergency vehicle when they hear of a siren, thanks to a fellow named Charles Cagniard de la Tour (1777-1859).  Wikipedia... gotta love it. Mandsford 00:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (without prejudice to later renomination) per the comments of User:Melsaran and myself at Requests for comment/Eyrian. The nominator is, broadly speaking, right that wikipedia should be purged of inappropriate trivia: however he and the other delete voters in this and a string of related AfDs are immediatists. The right approach is to give the matter considered thought, to review these types of articles with TLC and to extract from them the items that do have merit, and with what's left to consider whether a transwiki is a better option than outright deletion from the world wide web. The greatest weakness of wikipedia is the lack of respect that some members of the community have for the hard work of others, and an inability to see - or even to seek - the diamonds in the rough. AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Request to closing admin if this closes as a delete would you, instead, move it (protected if you feel it necessary) to a sub-page of User:AndyJones? AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per AndyJones, it is requirement that AfD's have proper discussion before an article gets deleted. As it stands now with the floods of related articles being nominated for deletion it is impossible for interested editors to properly discuss the deletions with the depth the articles and wikipedia deserve. Mathmo Talk 22:52, 8 August 2007 (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.