Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Origin of the Harp

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.

Deleted as WP:G12. Copied writings of Graeme R Gwin from here (site dead now); see also The Bow the Heart and the Harp (Poem). Abecedare (talk) 01:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the Harp

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This "article" (if you can call it that) does not meet G1 or A1. However, it is not at all readable, and the words are compacted together so much that I can't make head or tail of it. It's not gibberish, though, because it does mention psalms and quotes. If somebody could rewrite this article to make sense, that would be great. Thank you. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 19:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No idea what this is, might be some poem or essay, in which case deletable per WP:NOTESSAY or WP:OR. For those who are unaware, there's a discussion on this article here. This, to me, is a classic example of an article which (I believe) most see as un-encyclopedic, yet (strictly speaking) not caught by any of our CSD criteria. --Dps04 (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I put a link from that discussion to this discussion. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 19:27, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Harp#Origin which, unlike the present article, contains referenced text about the title subject. The article as it stands appears to be an WP:OR synthesis of psalm texts and speculation. Nothing there is worth preserving by merger. (CSD A10 might be possible?) AllyD (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article text appears to consist largely of the lyrics of a song by one Graeme R. Gwin: as can be heard here, so it appears to be a WP:COPYVIO apart from everything else. AllyD (talk) 19:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It’s not an article, and I can’t see how it can be turned into one. Mccapra (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't understand why we don't have a much quicker process for this. scope_creep^Talk 19:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per AllyD or delete (I know! We can move it to userspace and then U5 it! Genius! ...please don't actually do that). WP:NOTWEBHOST applies (but not in userspace or else I'd U5 it in an instant), appears to be a poem, song, essay or something like that. The suggested redirect makes sense to me - not a super likely search term, but plausible. creffett (talk) 20:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Creffett, The same article IS actually on the author's userpage. I'll tag with U5. Dps04 (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And the author's userpage was deleted... by Creffett!!! (Seriously though, good job.) --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 21:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's not an article, and there's nothing to salvage. North8000 (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's a poem/song lyric, not an encyclopedia article. There ought to be a CSD for "not an encyclopedia article or anything which could plausibly become one". Can we invoke WP:SNOW to close this AfD and avoid this stuff cluttering up the encyclopedia any longer? PamD 21:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The entire text after a rather garbled introductory section is a set of rhyming couplets:

A long, long time ago, in days of old:

Before “civilization” began to unfold:

Primitive tribes did roam the world:

In primitive ways before words unfurled:

Grunts and groans portrayed their voice:

In hope to convey the meaning’s choice: etc

PamD 21:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You know, it does look like a poem to me. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 22:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy A-10 perhaps on the basis that we already have Harp#Origin? PamD 22:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PamD, Origin of the Harp has nothing to do with Harp#Origin. Origin of the Harp is a sort of poem, while Harp#Origin talks about the creation of the harp itself. No, I don't think this is an A10... --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 22:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well it purports to tell the story of how the harp originated, albeit unsourced! And we need to find some grounds to get rid of something so completely unencyclopedic. But copyvio seems another worthwhile approach. PamD 22:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy A-11 Unsourced, obviously made up by creator, and no claim of significance. Schazjmd (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2020 (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.