Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Am (poem)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Keep per WP:SNOW. The poet is notable and the poem is notable. No point piling on. Tyrenius (talk) 01:13, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Am (poem)[edit]

I Am (poem) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

No indication as to what makes this poem particularly notable. It's just a poem. Corvus cornixtalk 00:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (or transwiki to WikiSource); non-notable --Orange Mike | Talk 00:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Just a poem? "Monsieur, à quoi peut bien servir l'enfant qui vient de naître ?" Mykej (talk) 02:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uh, yeah. And what does the article say that makes this poem notable? Corvus cornixtalk 03:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Big fan of our culture are you Corvus? The quote in French means 'what use is a newborn baby?' but was actually made by like this American type dude. Ben Franklin was in Paris and witnessed the first manned ballon flight by two Frenchmen in the Montgolfier brothers balloon. Some skeptics asked what the use of flying in the air might be, and Franklin's quip answered them perfectly. The point, made so ably by Mykej, is that this article has the potential to grow into something special if it's only given enough time to mature and isn't strangled at birth. Of course you knew that, I could tell by the way you said 'Um yeah'. Nick mallory (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I won't discuss your not-so-subtle digs at me, but only to respond that this "newborn baby" has been here since May without any indication as to why it's notable. Corvus cornixtalk 21:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't understand the subtle point made so elegently by Mykej, so that's why I took the time to explain it in "not so subtle" terms for you. It's not a "dig", writing an encyclopedia should be all about a keeness to learn new things shouldn't it? Be it about balloons, Ben Franklin or John Clare. As for why it's notable, I refer you to the many sources which other people including myself, have noted below. You are supposed to search for such sources yourself before nominating an article for AfD, and these sources clearly indicate notability, as everyone else here is telling you. What exactly did you 'looup' on Google to miss every single one of them? You have not acknowledged the point that such sources obviously show notability, indeed the quality of your counter arguments, by comparing the article on this famous poem to a raft of articles, which don't exist, on 'limerick's for instance, are less than compelling. I'm sorry if you think I'm merely making 'digs' but other contributers have asked if you're 'joking' by this nomination or said that it 'defies reason'. Do you still think you're right and nearly everyone else is wrong? Nick mallory (talk) 21:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. I'll cite WP:BOOKS due to lack of notability guidelines for poetry (hence, the weak keep.)The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable, even in the absence of secondary sources. According to the John Clare article it seems that the subject is a historically significant poet so it should be assumed that his works should be notable. I'm not familiar with English poetry so I cannot evaluate how significant this poet is.--Lenticel (talk) 04:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not the most famous of English poems, but Clare's best known work. In 1998 Slate published a reading by Robert Pinsky, then U.S. Poet Laureate. --Dhartung | Talk 05:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • KeepThe poem has been listed in several anthologies and textbooks ([1], [2], [3], [4]) and the first line of the poem is included in a book of familiar quotations ([5]). That's good enough for me. Zagalejo^^^ 06:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep You're joking. This is probably Clare's most famous single poem. --Folantin (talk) 10:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • KeepJohn Clare is a major English poet and this poem has been discussed by innumberable critics, writers and other sources. Even if we're just doing internet sources, how about the BBC [6] or Slate [7]? Essays like this [8] focussing on the poem are not uncommon. The New York Times calls it 'Clare's most famous poem' [9]. Did the nominator do any research at all before nominating this for deletion? Are the Masque of Anarchy or Fern Hill just poems too? Clare had enough strife in his life not to be treated like this now. Nick mallory (talk) 10:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did some looups, but the common words in the title made anything meaningful difficult to find. Corvus cornixtalk 21:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You did some 'looups'? I just put "I am" "John Clare" into google and came up with 25,000 hits and any of the hits on the first ten pages would show you that the poem is obviously worthy of note. What exactly did you try to 'looup'? Nick mallory (talk) 22:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No need to pounce on someone's typo. Zagalejo^^^ 00:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A good way to research a poem with a title like that is to take a line from the poem and run a Google search. For example: 221 Google Book hits for ""My friends forsake me like a memory lost". Zagalejo^^^ 00:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep John Clare, along with his works, is one of the most well-known of 19th-century poets. Quite why we should delete his magnum opus on the grounds of being just a poem, defies reason. Chris.B (talk) 15:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a notable poem, by a notable author. Even a much maligned google search comes up with sources. If the article didn't say it was notable, then edit it. We are the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, even deletionists. Once again, AfD is not cleanup. Woody (talk) 22:54, 20 December 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/I_Am_(poem)&oldid=1137923841"