Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hebenon: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 07:00, 11 February 2022

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. MBisanz ^talk 18:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hebenon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hebanon is not a word, the only occurrence is in Shakespeare, where the word is "Hebona". This page appears to be the result of a typo in the Hamlet quote. Edmund Blackadder (talk) 17:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, surprisingly. I wouldn't think that there would be much room for expansion for an article on a Shakespearean hapax legomenon, but it seems I may be wrong. Searches of both books and scholarly articles reveals that a strangely large amount of attention has been paid to this one-off plant reference, in everything from language studies to a 1950 article in The Journal of Laryngology & Otology to more recent botany and medicine journals. Even today, there's evidently quite a bit of open debate on the topic. As for the hebona/hebenon distinction and the proper title for the article, the former appears in the Quartos, the latter in the Folios. Hebenon seems rather more common in the analytical literature, however. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 19:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added a bunch of sources. Interesting topic. The sources allow for a big expansion of the article on theories about the identity of the poison. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 03:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are tons of sources from the 19th century, all full-text. Google "hebona site:archive.org" --Green Cardamom (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't know if this is a good reason to keep it. However, if I came across this word in Shakespeare or elsewhere, I would first search Wikipedia for information that went beyond a dictionary definition and would be surprised and disappointed not to find a full explanation and various linked sources. Kooky2 (talk) 21:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was    '''keep'''. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 18:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 ===[[Hebenon]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|U}}
 :{{la|Hebenon}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hebenon|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 October 9#{{anchorencode:Hebenon}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hebenon Stats]</span>)
 :({{Find sources|Hebenon}})
 Hebanon is not a word, the only occurrence is in Shakespeare, where the word is "Hebona".  This page appears to be the result of a typo in the Hamlet quote. [[User:Edmund Blackadder|Edmund Blackadder]] ([[User talk:Edmund Blackadder|talk]]) 17:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
-*'''Keep,''' surprisingly.  I wouldn't think that there would be much room for expansion for an article on a Shakespearean ''hapax legomenon'', but it seems I may be wrong.  Searches of both books and scholarly articles reveals that a strangely large amount of attention has been paid to this one-off plant reference, in everything from language studies to a [http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=731528 1950 article] in ''The Journal of Laryngology & Otology'' to more recent [http://www.springerlink.com/content/22l4301765v27333/ botany] and [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0035920309000753 medicine] journals.  Even today, there's evidently quite a bit of open debate on the topic.  As for the hebona/hebenon distinction and the proper title for the article, the former appears in the Quartos, the latter in the Folios.  Hebenon seems rather more common in the analytical literature, however. [[User:Squeamish Ossifrage|Squeamish Ossifrage]] ([[User talk:Squeamish Ossifrage|talk]]) 19:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
+*'''Keep,''' surprisingly.  I wouldn't think that there would be much room for expansion for an article on a Shakespearean ''hapax legomenon'', but it seems I may be wrong.  Searches of both books and scholarly articles reveals that a strangely large amount of attention has been paid to this one-off plant reference, in everything from language studies to a [http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=731528 1950 article] in ''The Journal of Laryngology & Otology'' to more recent [https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF02860641 botany] and [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0035920309000753 medicine] journals.  Even today, there's evidently quite a bit of open debate on the topic.  As for the hebona/hebenon distinction and the proper title for the article, the former appears in the Quartos, the latter in the Folios.  Hebenon seems rather more common in the analytical literature, however. [[User:Squeamish Ossifrage|Squeamish Ossifrage]] ([[User talk:Squeamish Ossifrage|talk]]) 19:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature|list of Literature-related deletion discussions]]. — [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 20:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)</small>
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organisms|list of Organisms-related deletion discussions]]. — [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 20:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)</small>
 *'''Keep''' Added a bunch of sources. Interesting topic. The sources allow for a big expansion of the article on theories about the identity of the poison. -- [[User:Green Cardamom|Green Cardamom]] ([[User talk:Green Cardamom|talk]]) 03:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 :*There are tons of sources from the 19th century, all full-text. Google "hebona site:archive.org" --[[User:Green Cardamom|Green Cardamom]] ([[User talk:Green Cardamom|talk]]) 04:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' I don't know if this is a good reason to keep it.  However, if I came across this word in Shakespeare or elsewhere, I would first search Wikipedia for information that went beyond a dictionary definition and would be surprised and disappointed not to find a full explanation and various linked sources. [[User:Kooky2|Kooky2]] ([[User talk:Kooky2|talk]]) 21:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>