Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/An Unforgiving Poem

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 delete. Tone 14:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

An Unforgiving Poem

An Unforgiving Poem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete unref'd article about a poem by redlink author with no claim to notability asserted. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• Speedy delete Maybe I should see if A9 should be extended to include other works only in cases where no notability is asserted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

comment - A9 is only for music recordings and is very explicit in stating that it does not extend to other types of media. Also, the fact that the author is redlinked, may be indicative for lack of notability, but is not conclusive as the fact that it is a red-link means that nobody has written an article about the subject. Wikipedia is not complete. And in this particular case, after some searching, it appears the writer may in fact be notable, but just doesn't have an article. Her short story in a collection is mentioned in this book review. The poem itself has been published here although it is unclear in what context. so by no means is this something that should be put under speedy deletion. -- Whpq (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

As you see, I didn't speedy delete it; I brought it here. That said, I agree with TenPoundHammer's comments about extending A9. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Extending A9 might very well be a good idea, but AFD is not the forum for discussing such a policy change. -- Whpq (talk) 00:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

• Speedy delete without prejudice. All we learn from this article is the existence of a poem by this name by an author we know nothing about. The speedy deletion criteria about unimportant music recordings does not apply here. But several others do: this is a very brief article that tells us very little about the subject. The poem may be noteworthy; hard to say until we have an actual article about it. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:08, 9 January 2009 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.