Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strigoi 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   merge to Vampires in popular culture. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Strigoi in popular culture

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

Trivia of the worst sort - uncited, irrelevant, out of context listcruft. As a very distant second, I'd merge this back into strigoi, which was hardly long enough to warrant a split, but really, we may as well get rid of this one. Biruitorul Talk 05:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Rather uncivil, per WP:Cruft: "use of this term may be regarded as pejorative, and when used in discussion about another editor's contributions, it can sometimes be regarded as uncivil." Also though it is not required, it is courteous to notify the creator of this page of the AfD. Ikip (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge to strigoi after removing any redlink examples and add a 'sources' tag to the section. Edward321 (talk) 05:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge Delete Optimistic and trivial. Dahn (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I strongly oppose any kind of merge into Strigoi. I've seen a lot of these sections, and I'm sure that no sources are likely to be forthcoming. Keeping this kind of material in the main article gives a completely unbalanced perspective of the creature, per WP:WEIGHT, giving excessive importance to modern (often American) cultural references over fundamental mythologies. It absolutely should remain separate, and there is no fault in having a short article in either place; it simply means there is more room for new, relevant material. Mintrick (talk) 13:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with Mintrick's opinion that this list shouldn't be merged, but I disagree that the conclusion to be drawn is that it should remain. This is an indiscriminate list of factoids that, even if it were sourced, adds nothing to anyone's knowledge about strigoi. If anyone can demonstrate that "strigoi in popular culture" has been a topic of secondary sources that would support an article, I'll reconsider. Deor (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Vampires in popular culture (and its related articles such as Vampire films)    The use of notable legendary or mythological concepts in major works of fiction is notable. If the fiction is notable to have an article here, and if a  strigol is of major significance within it, a listing is appropriate. But I am not convinced that in most of the works anything specific is in fact being referred to that is any different fro vampires, just using a less familiar name. DGG (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge Per DGG, our readers and editors want this information so it's our job to present it encyclopedicly with due weight. -- Banj e  b oi   00:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge Ikip (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment this page was actually moved to its own page today, from the original Strigoi page. Ikip (talk) 00:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge anything worth having into Vampires in popular culture. I'm usually not a fan of dumping a dreadful article on a decent one, but both articles really need the same cleanup. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 02:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Reading the description of the things from their main article, it is clear that most of the time, the word does NOT refer to vampires, but other things. And why is it alright for a similar mythical creature, vampires, to have a side article listing their appearances in popular culture, but not Strigoi?  There are enough notable references of it, to warrant its own page.  I would like to see a list of classical text written about them, if any have been translated from the Romanian.  Someone could then use the information to find out how these stories have evolved, influencing and being influenced by history.   D r e a m Focus  17:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing more than a list of appearances. No actual content to merge anywhere. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 17:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into the vampires article, per all of the above. Artw (talk) 23:32, 4 May 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.