Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aba (nymph)

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 merge to Ergiske. MBisanz ^talk 01:25, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aba (nymph)[edit]

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

Few sources, little notability, search has revealed little new information. ᶲAstridᶲ • ^{(Let's do this!)} 21:25, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 October 23. Snotbot t • c » 22:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Ergiske. I managed to find a reference for the subject, The Folds of Parnassos, published by the University of Texas Press. Although she's a real mythological figure, she's a very minor character, and mainly known as part of the foundation myth of the ancient region of Ergiske, as mother of its founder.--xanchester (t) 16:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Actually, there are more than a few references from serious sources (just do a Google book search on Aba+Ergiske), which however all do not say more about the nymph than that she is the mother of Ergiskos, the legendary founder of Ergiske. I found no source for the claim in the article that "Aba was a nymph of the town of Ergiske", so that snippet should not be merged. --Lambiam 20:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I concur that the first sentence is uncited and should not be merged. But the second sentence, claiming that Aba is the mother of Ergiskos, founder of Ergiske, is verifiable, and should be merged with the Ergiske article. The nymph, in all the sources that I've come across, only appears as part of the etymology of the name Ergiske, as mother of the region's founder and namesake.--xanchester (t) 21:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per xanchester. The subject has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources, as shown by a Google Books search, and thus falls short of the WP:GNG. But there is one result cited above that shows it is verifiable, and hence could be included in Ergiske. --Batard0 (talk) 06:11, 30 October 2012 (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.