Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Doubt of Future Foes


 * 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. Courcelles 00:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

The Doubt of Future Foes

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article is about an old poem, and consits of the poem itself, and then a paragraph about the life of Elizabeth I. The paragraph doesn't mention the poem at all, and there isnt really an article here. I've got no objections about moving the poem to WikiSource though. Acather96 (talk) 11:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

With some improvements (LOTS of clean-up, wikification), this article could become meaningful. It does not appear to be a candidate for deletion in its own right. Slayer (talk) 17:14, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep It needs a bit of work, but the poem does seem to be indeed by Elizabeth I, and the paragraph does seem to me to explain the circumstances. It's far more what Wikipedia is about than is an article about some 12 year old rapper who has self-recorded a mixtape (and sold three copies of it), or some two men, one girl and a dog company that has written a program that does what about ten others have done for the last six years. Peridon (talk) 19:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I rearranged the article slightly. It is clearly an attempt to write about the poem, although it needs some more direct references and explanation. The poem itself is already on Wikisource. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment That looks better - but wasn't there a link to Regnans in excelsis before? Peridon (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Jonathon Oldenbuck. More refs would be nice, obviously. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:32, 22 December 2010 (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.