Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spear of Destiny 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 delete. This is not an article - it's just a list of loosely associated facts (ie, trivia). The best way to gauge if it's a list of trivia? See how many of its entries falls into the format of "In x, y appears".-Wafulz 14:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Spear of Destiny in popular culture

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Collection of trivia, rarely using more than the name. Eyrian 19:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong delete - Well written, but full of loosely associated and unrelated topics with little in common except for the spear of destiny. → Hot   Dog   Wolf  20:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all %SUBJECT% in popular culture lists, they are nothing but trivia and violate the five pillars of Wikipedia as well. Burntsauce 21:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Categorize notable and verifiable articles that contain a major reference or influence of the story of the Holy Lance and then delete the article. (Best to put the list in userspace after the deletion so this can be done). CaveatLectorTalk 22:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup the more tangential references. How do "In Popular Culture" articles violate Five pillars?  Be more specific. --Transfinite (Talk / Contribs) 22:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Wikipedia is not a trivia collection" Bearcat 04:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as trivia collection. If some cultural impact is to be demonstrated, this can be done in prose, with references and in the main article. Bullet lists of simple trivia, on the other hand, has no place here. Punkmorten 00:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Trivia collection, WP:5 Corpx 02:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Deleting information, however trivial, means too much to some of you to support. Bcarlson33 02:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Umm, could you comment on the content of this article, and how you feel it meets policy? Resolute 04:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Emperor's comments below sum up why I feel it meets policy - although I'm sure you've noted that I don't exactly subscribe to the policy of deleting information. Cheers, Bcarlson33 15:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had, but "Keep, because I don't like deleting things" is not a valid AfD argument. Resolute 23:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup There are quite a few notable outtings of the SoD. This just needs to be policed with a solid criteria and trivial mentions rooted out, references sought, etc. (Emperor 02:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC))
 * But the evidence that that just doesn't happen with these "articles" is overwhelming. Golfcam 23:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have seen entries of the "in popular culture" that are waste bins for any passing trivial mention which deserve to be deleted. That isn't to say that every "in popular culture" entry should go - they all have to be judged on their own merits. The key is to establishing a solid remit and policing it. The lead makes it clear that it is for prominent roles and this needs to be pursued. I'd like to see the number of items trimmed down and the items expanded on, as is done for the film Constantine. There are other non-trivial appearances of the Spear (the one that brought me here being The Spear which is all about it). Other mentions appear to be trivial - he Hellboy bit is a clear example, as it stands it suggests we see the spear in a cabinet in passing. Set dressing is clearly trivial and (as I've done on other similar entries) I'd move it to the talk page. If someone can expand it to show it's importance to the film (I am pretty sure it is trivial in the film) then it can go back in, with references because if it is not a trivial mention it should be in a review or overview. I think compared to a lot of i.p.c. entries this one is in good enough shape to be cleaned up and made into a solid entry looking at non-trivial parts the SoD has played in media. (Emperor 02:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC))
 * Delete trivia, collection of loosely associated topics, etc, etc, etc. Resolute 04:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Facts can be covered appropriately by lists, topics cannot. Golfcam 23:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Total trivia list. Biggspowd 02:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup as per Emperor. I admit that I wasn't acquainted with the name "Spear of Destiny", but this, like the Holy Grail or the Ark of the Covenant, is a Biblical reference that is a recurring theme in adventure books and movies.  People have been buying into this for centuries.  Mandsford 01:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup per Emperor and Mandsford. There's definitely the potential for a good article here. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:TRIVIA. IPSOS (talk) 23:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup as per Emperor, Mandsford and Josiah Rowe. It's presence and affect in popular culture is not trivial and use of examples would be a relevant way to express this.Number36 00:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, Not as bad as some, but still mostly trivia. Crazysuit 04:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - another collection of loosely associated things passed off as an article. Otto4711 13:02, 31 July 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.