Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mermaid art

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.

Mermaid art[edit]

The result was Merge. We've actually got an article on Dorothy Dinnerstein, mostly referring to her Mermaid book, so that part, symbolism, seems a useful thing to include in the Mermaid article. The rest is, as stated, uncited research. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaur art. More of the same Myth Art cruft. Twredfish 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also Lamia art per same. Note that "Media" section is copypaste among all three articles. Twredfish 01:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the bits which actually relate to both mermaids and art to Mermaid#Artwork; not nearly a wide enough topic to merit its own article. --Sneftel 02:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, however the only 'bits which actually relate to both mermaids and art' is the second paragraph under "Appearance", which is 100% unsourced original research and therefore not worthy of merge. What else is salvagable from this? Twredfish 18:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph might be salvaged with appropriate references (though I'm not holding my breath), but I was more looking at the "Symbolic Significance" paragraph. --Sneftel 18:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, gotcha. Though none of that is even related to art, rather only to Mermaids themselves. Twredfish 22:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Snefty -Toptomcat 04:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merege per Sneftel - elsewise we'd have a bizillion grade school kids' pictures of unicorns and mermaids as articles! SkierRMH,07:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete though anything relevent could be merged to Mermaid per Sneftel if an interested party wants to undertake it and not leave it for the closing admin to take care of (this goes for Lamia as well). Mermaid art is art illustrating mermaids? I'm glad we had this article to explain that...--Isotope23 14:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Most of this looks like informations about mermaids themselves or original research. —ShadowHalo 16:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above FirefoxMan 16:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Isotope23. If there is any useful content here it could be merged, but I didn't see much worth keeping. Doc Tropics 18:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I suppose I didn't explain my reasons for nominating this very well, figuring people would link-follow to the same discussion from yesterday on Centaur art. Justification there was: 'Origial Resarch about artwork depicting centaurs. Unverifiable. Largely unsourced. 3 rambling pages from a previous seeming problem user, no links to this article, and no other (non-bot) edits.' Mermaid and Lamia are not substantially better articles than Centaur, which so far has nothing but delete suggested. In fact, Mermaid and Lamia cite fewer 'references' than even Centaur, which consists only of links to online art galleries from NN amateur artists. All three of these articles are 100% OR. Twredfish 18:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Eusebeus 11:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP BUT ORGANIZE - Mermaid as a topic, clearly has many subcategories worth of their own pages and/or lists. Consider:

Mermaid

Mermaid Art & Artists

Mermaid Tattoos

Mermaid's in Fiction

Mermaid's in Mythology

SweetGodiva 22:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge — You make the case that it should remain, but as a section in the mermaid article. After that, if it grows large enough, it can be split off again. Val42 00:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete absolutely outright - nothing worth merging. This is just a compendium of OR and unreferenced - no sources at all, and no reliable ones - gobbledegook. Moreschi ^Deletion! 10:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can't see anything worth salvaging. I think all the valuable info is already in the main Mermaid article. --Folantin 10:58, 19 December 2006 (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.