Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powers of Darkness (Iceland)

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. This should not preclude a merge discussion, but there's a general consensus against outright deletion of the content, and the creator has said they are working on sorting it out. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Powers of Darkness (Iceland)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article is a duplicate of Powers of Darkness. Material is virtually identical, but the other one has a better title. (Iceland) is unnecessary to disambiguate. No reason to have two of these. EDIT: It turns out there are three? Powers of Darkness (Sweden)? — ImaginesTigers (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per my discussion with A.S. Brown, I'd like to withdraw this nomination to give them time to meaningfully differentiate the articles. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I'll get to work on it this weekend. Thank you for your patience and kindness. Cheers! --A.S. Brown (talk) 08:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article is mostly a copy of the other one. Most of the extra citations are the result of citation overkill. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 01:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If there's anything that needs to be merged, then merge but otherwise delete. No need for a duplicate. If this was recently created then we could speedy this, but it was made back in 2019 and evaded detection until now, apparently. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:24, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, even as the nominator. I should have first tried uncontroversially merged, like I did for Powers of Darkness (Sweden) Was silly not to... — ImaginesTigers (talk) 04:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Revert to the last non-duplicated version of the page. Merge selectively as necessary or delete, good catch. - Astrophobe (talk) 06:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Striking my vote per the information in the discussion below between the nominator and the original page author. - Astrophobe (talk) 05:38, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the article Powers of Darkness. (It's incredible that both articles created by same user, A.S. Brown). - Yitbe ^A-21 07:00, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The reason this page is now a duplicate is becuse someone decided to add a bunch of stuff from this page to the main page instead of letting it be. Both the Icelandic and Swedish versions have enough written about them that two pages is helpful.★Trekker (talk) 09:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:11, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With all due respect, Yitbe, the articles as created by me in 2019 were quite different-the duplication is due to the work of other hands. Treker is quite right. This subject about the mysterious history of these novels are the academic equivalent of a current event article as new information is coming out constantly. Treker and I had a discussion about this, and it was decided to keep the main article from getting too big by breaking it up into sub-articles. I would favor reverting back to the set-up of 2019, but if that is unacceptable, then merge the two articles together. --A.S. Brown (talk) 01:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't oppose a merge whatsoever. I should have just done so. In fact, since they're being maintained, Delete might be harmful to properly integrate the content to where it belongs. I'm in favour of a merge now and wish I hadn't initiated the AfD without just bringing it up on the Talk! — ImaginesTigers (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ImaginesTigers, I'm willing to be flexible about this, and I'm open to a merger or redirect. But I still think that there is enough material to warrant separate sub-articles on the Icelandic and Swedish versions of this novel, especially as new information keeps coming out. I think that undoing the work of other hands, which caused this duplication, is the best solution. I'm afraid that having everything merged into one big article could cause an article that is too big, but I'm willing to consider a merger if you think it can be done in a way that works. --A.S. Brown (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2021 (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.