Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orobius

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. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 00:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orobius[edit]

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

Article about a literary figure, based on the Deipnosophistae, but written like a historical fact. Any historians here? Please take care of it. Ben Ben (talk) 23:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Orobius or Orbius appears to have been a historical figure. He's mentioned in the very context that Athenaeus reports in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica. Simply because the Deipnosophistae is a work of literature doesn't mean that it doesn't describe real persons or events. This article may benefit from a rewrite, and if possible in-line citations, or at least multiple sources. But we don't delete articles simply because they need to be improved. P Aculeius (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Ben Ben (talk) 23:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. czar · · 00:13, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yep, historical figure with a primary source supported by a good modern source. davidiad { t } 01:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:POLITICIANS, I guess, but there seems to be some confusion. Broughton gives two Orbii: Publius Orbius, a presumed praetor for 65, and propraetor in 64; and (in the suppl. vol. 3) Lucius Orbius around 189. The current article links to Mithradates, who wasn't born till 134 and thus would pertain to Publius, not Lucius. It may be that we should just have an Orbius page (or Orbia (gens)?) since so little is known of either of them. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens 445 with n. 1 (whence Pritchett's "Lucius") makes it look as though there's no intended identification of this figure and Broughton's Lucius, but I don't have access to Magistrates, so I can't tell if he addresses the same evidence. davidiad { t } 18:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: not a literary but a historical figure. The identification with "Lucius Orbius" agrees with the footnote in the new edition of the Deipnosophists by S. D. Olson (vol. 2 [2006] p. 529 note 162), who says "Lucius Orbius, a distinguished Roman resident of Delos", but no references. I haven't looked further at the possible sources for this. Andrew Dalby 18:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote: Ben Ben may well have been surprised, because the Deipnosophists is generally described as a fictional dialogue. Yes, that is how it is structured. But this structure serves as a vehicle for the author's historical knowledge, which is wide-ranging and usually accurate. Andrew Dalby 20:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Close and keep Thank you for your explanation. Even if nobody attempted to improve the article I step back from wanting it deleted. EOD for me. --Ben Ben (talk) 21:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:42, 7 May 2013 (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.