Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cult fiction

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. - Mailer Diablo 18:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cult fiction[edit]

Delete - indiscriminate list with no objective criteria for inclusion, relying on POV and OR. There is a "bibliography" but nowhere in the article is it indicated that any of the information in the article comes from an item on the bibliography or from any other reliable source. Otto4711 16:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NOT, WP:OR, and WP:POV --sumnjim ^{talk with me·changes} 16:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --R e m i 20:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but fix or cleanup. There's actually a book [1] on this subject, not to mention lots of scholar hits [2] so I accept that there's enough to make a good article here. FrozenPurpleCube 00:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Is something having cult status hard to define? Yes. Does that mean we shouldn't have an article on it? No. Tag it with source requests where appropriate and move on. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The phenomenon is real enough, but ditch the list of examples, unless of course there are reliable sources for all of them. -Running On Brains 23:25, 2 May 2007 (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.