Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gorgons and Medusa in popular culture

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 --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gorgons and Medusa in popular culture[edit]

The trend with "in popular culture" topics, wittily captured by this former embedded list, is over the top and is now heading downhill.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smilodon in popular culture, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Strangelove in popular culture as well as several others just today. Punkmorten 23:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or drastically reduce--the gorgon article is already lengthy enough without this list added on at the end. Also, keeping a separate list reduces the number of pop culture fans who want to add every single instance of gorgons on the main, encyclopedic article. I'd rather not see a huge list bog down a perfectly good article. 24.14.198.8 00:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Chris G.[reply]
Strong keep - It is absolutely proper to spin off long sections into a separate article. The fictional representations discussed here are certainly notable (though the page itself could use trimming) but not so much on the main article. Nominator sounds like he doesn't personally like "in popular culture articles," which is his preference, but NOT a reason to delete. These are created for a specific, encyclopedic purpose. Frankly, if you delete this, all you'll end up doing is seeing the main article fill up with nonsense and it'll be spun off into a new article again. Don't waste everyone's time. DreamGuy 00:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not the place to itemize mentions of every mythical creature out there. Doing something like this is way too trivial and unmaintainable Corpx 00:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Extremely indiscriminate list of insignificant references, even a simple mention of the word "gorgon" is enough to be added here. Masaruemoto 02:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete As per Masruemoto. For instance, a Star Trek episode where Melvin Belli's character was named "Gorgon" is on here. In a shorter, less inclusive form this might have merit. Mandsford 16:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an argument to EDIT the article, not to DELETE the article. DreamGuy 23:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a directory of loosely associated terms, WP:NOT#DIR. Jay32183 20:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So edit it, it's not a reason to delete it. There's nothing about the article title that means it can only be a directory, it's just that that's how it ended up. DreamGuy 23:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a reason to delete. It isn't a formatting problem. The article connects things that aren't connected. It's original research, as is everything that fails WP:NOT#DIR. Jay32183 03:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak keep pending a cut-down and cleanup. Nothing wrong with a non-duplicating fork if its content is worthwhile, but this content stretches the definition laid down by the title. It needs to be trimmed down and better sourced. Adrian M. H. 15:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom & ample precedent. No WP:RS to show entry of Gorgons & Medusa into popular culture. Carlossuarez46 22:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What? The fact that Clash of the Titans came out, and other mentions, has plenty of reliable sources. Your argument is that Medusa and Gorgon aren't in popular culture? That makes no sense. And there is no precedent that these types of articles be removed, as many, many ones have survived deletion votes or never got nominated in the first place.DreamGuy 23:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If "Gorgon" and "Medusa" are are notable in popular culture, then so are mentions of every greek mythology character in "popular culture". There should be an article for every time Zeus is mentioned in "popular culture". Every time Cyclops is mentioned. We dont need to note everytime a myth characater was mentioned in a tv show/movie. Corpx 03:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 14:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 14:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because this is clearly an indiscriminate list of trivia. Wikipedia is not a directory of loosely-associated topics. There is no notability asserted about the presence of Medusa and Gorgons in popular culture, and the criteria apparently ranges from song names to villainous presences in TV episodes. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reason that Erik just listed above. There are thousands of articles that have ridiculously long trivia and popular culture sections without spinning them off into their own articles. Trusilver 19:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Erik above said it very well. Ditch as an indiscriminate list of trivia. María (críticame) 18:43, 3 July 2007 (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.