Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow mythology

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Hermione1980 23:32, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Rainbow mythology

POV, Original research. Only link is to website from where entire text has been copied. The subject of rainbows in mythology may be interesting, but its not an actual topic of historical research, that I know of; either way, this article is merely a summary of one author's beliefs regarding rainbows, as indicated by the first line of the article ("The following is adapted from [book] .." If it were 'List: Rainbows in mythology', I might buy it, but not one sentence in this article presents any relevant, cited information. Generally reads like typical "New Age" fare. Also isn't linked from any other article.

• Delete per nomination.Eaglizard 08:05, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and improve, or Userfy. I would say delete due to copyright violation, but the original poster is User:Blakeee and the webpage from which the article is copied belongs to Blake Ebersole. They may be the same person. Three other points: 1) Wikipedia is not a repository for original research, but that doesn't mean that articles cannot cite books of original research by others. Citing just one book doesn't necessarily render an article "original research." 2) It is unclear what is meant in the nomination regarding "rainbows in mythology" not being a topic of "historical research." While article does not cite sources for individual facts, the book the article claims as a source appears to be a legitimate book dealing with the topic of rainbows as depicted in mythology. It was published by Pennsylvania State University Press, which at least implies serious research on the topic. 3) While specific sources for the stories are not cited, several of them are well-known mythological tales that would be reasonably simple to verify. (e.g. bifrost, which has a Wikipedia article.) Perhaps this could have been better titled "Rainbows in mythology." Crypticfirefly 16:53, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup, most of it is not original research. Gazpacho 19:27, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
• I am Blake Ebersole, and I had sourced 'Rainbow Mythology' from said PSU Press book, yet however I did not post that on wikipedia. While that excerpt found on my website rainbowlight.net may be copyrighted, as long as the original source by Dr. Lee is referenced, I give permission for it to be posted on wikipedia. Additionally, said referenced book is as legitimate as I have read on the subject, contains over a hundred references itself. IMHO 'original research' is a fuzzy term like 'reasonable doubt' and very subjective. The words in 'rainbow mythology' are mine but the ideas and the 'original research' comes from Dr. Lee's book. -- (presumably a keep - moved from top by Eaglizard) Unsigned edit 02:23, 9 October 2005 by User: 68.58.96.227. Eaglizard 03:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment by nominator. By original research in this case, I didn't mean the individual facts mentioned in the article (which only need citation), but rather the concept of a 'Rainbow mythology'. Again, if it were 'Rainbows in mythology', that would be different. But, other than as a book title, there just isn't any actual thing called 'Rainbow mythology'. (BTW, Blake, thanks for contributing. However, your disclaimer above isn't enough: you must list it under the GNU Free Documentation License. But personally I think using COPYVIO to AfD a non-commercial page would be a cheap hack). In any case, my only goal is to help clear the August 2004 cleanup page, so if it gets a thumbs up, I'll rewrite it myself. But it will be Rainbows IN mythology, if I do. Eaglizard 04:08, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep a collection of facts about the occurrence of the rainbow in different mythologies. It's not original research since it is a collection from other researchs. Interesting and useful to people asking how rainbows fit into various mythologies. Does need cleanup. Should be rewritten to clear copyright because we can't guarantee to maintain source reference.RJFJR 16:40, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Agree with above regarding cleanup, copyvio etc; and possible move to "Rainbows in mythology". Perhaps should be reorganized by ethnic tradition rather than mythological conception. Mashford 11:06, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and clean up.--Kross 08:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and clean up Though I agree with Eaglizard that this should be Rainbows In Mythology rather than Rainbow Mythology. Hulleye 10:24, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge or rewrite: there's already a brief section on mythology in Rainbow, but if there's too much material to merge in there (which isn't clear to me), this should be rewritten as "Rainbows in mythology" as per developing consensus. Haeleth 16:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. I think there is enough valuable information here to be worth a separate article, with a reference to it in the Rainbow article section on "Rainbows in religion and mythology" stating "Main article:" etc., but it should be titled "Rainbows in mythology" and it should be cleaned up quite a bit, preferably organized by ethnic group/tradition, and all the speculation on cultural belief systems, on why Homer did what he did, and the moral of the story ("myriad of human beliefs...") should be removed as un-encyclopedic. Another reference or two would be nice also.--Cromwellt | Talk 23:21, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.