Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hobbs End

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. --BDD (talk) 18:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hobbs End[edit]

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

Non-notable fictional concept. Article collects a series of incidents in which some variation of "Hobbs End" or "Hobbs Lane" or the like was used in a work of fiction, along with a couple of examples that in the unreferenced opinion of one editor or another sound like they could refer to "Hobbs End" or "Hobbs Lane" and via synthesis declares them an article. There are no reliable sources that discuss the topic of "Hobbs End" in the context of the real world that are required for an article on an aspect or element of fiction. PROD contested on the basis of this supposed source but the source actually proves the point that this fictional subject, when mentioned at all, is mentioned in the most passing and trivial of ways. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 14:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unsourced original essay. It's not bad, mind you, just not appropriate for WP. Carrite (talk) 16:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep How is this "unsourced" [1]? "Hobb" is a long-established name for the devil, Hobbs End or Hobbs Lane placenames with such implications and multiple horror writers have picked up on this as a literary trope. This is widely cited for their occurrences and Muir's book shows considered literary criticism of this use. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Muir mentions this in one paragraph out of a 700 page book and the paragraph is about the filmFallen, not about any of the various fictional places called Hobbs End. There need to be sources that discuss in substantive detail the concept of "Hobbs End" itself, not just mentions of it in sources that are entirely about other things. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 21:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This seems to consist of a bit of information about the television and film versions of Quatermass and the Pit, in both of which articles the scripts' connection between "Hob" and the devil receives sufficient mention, to which has been added a collection of other instances in which "Hob(b)(')s" occurs in place names—almost all of which seem to be either completely unrelated or clearly alluding to the Quatermass usage. As for the Muir book, it's a single source making the claim that "horror programming ... [has] used the name 'Hobbs' to ... denote a source of evil" in the course of "explaining" the use of the name "Hobbes" for a character who's not evil. Not very persuasive, to say the least. (I wonder what Muir's exegesis of the name of Roy Hobbs in The Natural or of Miranda Hobbes on Sex and the City might look like.) In short, except for the Quatermass usages, which are covered elsewhere, the article seems to constitute inadmissible original research. Deor (talk) 13:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Lamberhurst (talk) 16:34, 23 October 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.