Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flauros: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 07:40, 17 October 2009

Flauros

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

This article is a content fork of The Lesser Key of Solomon and fails to meet the notability criteria ~~as a fictional character~~; one of 72 types of demon mentioned in the main article. The article is unlikely to ever become more than trivial as no other sources say more about this ~~character~~ than Ars Goetia, and can be easily merged back to The Lesser Key of Solomon. Wikipedia does not benefit from having an article for every ~~fictional~~religious or mythical character or neologism from every book ever published. Ash (talk) 13:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, looks like copyvio to me. See Monsterpedia, but I suspect there might be an older source both are drawing from. Abductive (reasoning) 07:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Calling a demon named in a grimoire a "fictional character" is simple disparagement of a belief system, and manifests bias. The S. L. MacGregor Mathers 1905 translation of the Lesser Key of Solomon is public domain in the USA, and we're free to lift text from it. There might well be better ways to handle the named and listed demons from the Lesser Key of Solomon - some kind of table would be nice - but the stated grounds for this nomination are simply wrong, and invite pot-shots from village atheists, scientistics, and positivists at all unpopular mythologies. That would be a very bad precedent to set. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (Rephrasing nomination) I have struck the word "fictional" from the nomination as per your objection. This does not invalidate the nomination or contradict any other comments made in this discussion.—Ash (talk) 16:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lesser Key of Solomon as per my reasoning on Sere. Flauros is not notable other than within the context of this Grimoire. End pot-shot from village atheist. ;) Simonm223 (talk) 16:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We need independent sources in order to determine what encyclopedic coverage of a topic should look like. Without them, it should look like a redirect. - 2/0 (cont.) 07:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 **(Rephrasing nomination) I have struck the word "fictional" from the nomination as per your objection. This does not invalidate the nomination or contradict any other comments made in this discussion.—[[User:Ash|Ash]] ([[User talk:Ash|talk]]) 16:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Redirect to [[Lesser Key of Solomon]]''' as per my reasoning on Sere.  Flauros is not notable other than within the context of this Grimoire.  End pot-shot from village [[atheism|atheist]]. ;) [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 16:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' We need independent sources in order to determine what encyclopedic coverage of a topic should look like. Without them, it should look like a redirect. - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] <small>([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]])</small> 07:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)