Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy (demon)

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. Please discuss merge options on the appropriate talk page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 21:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amy (demon)

Amy_(demon) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

This article is of no consequence. It covers a subject matter that is, if not entirely fictional, of really no consequence. We have no need for this kind of thing on Wikipedia. The article is writtenn well enough to become convincing to the passerby, but "president of hell"?! Just delete this thing. Deepdesertfreman 23:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• "President of hell"? Well, someone's got to do it.... Anyway, this is just one article of 72 for each demon listed in Goetia and it has more sources than most of the others. Maybe this would be a case for an annotated list for all of them? --Tikiwont 16:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:ATT and definitely fails WP:BULLSHIT. RGTraynor 16:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• Merge, I hope you guys are not voting for delete merely because of a goofy phrase in the article, which is due to clumsy writing. It appears Amy has appeared in Pseudomonarchia Daemonum, see http://www.esotericarchives.com/solomon/weyer.htm and search for Amy. Whether this character deserves its own article is debatable, it's proably best to just merge all the demons into one article, ie List of demons in Goetia. hateless 18:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• 'Delete' Possibly merge - sort out list of demons as a whole (see comments below). Non-notable spirit of darkness. Yes, he/she gets a mention in Pseudomonarchia Daemonum but so do 68 other demons. If you've ever read any of these Renaissance demonologies you'll know these things tend to be jam-packed with the names of petty devils. I mean, it's worth having an article on Mephistopheles, say, but I think Amy probably fails WP:BIO. Beelzebubcruft. --Folantin 18:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

*Delete, either a hoax or a typo. On checking the Pseudomonarchia Daemonum, there is no Amy there - the 58th demon is "Vapula, is a great duke and strong". There is an "Aym" in there, which this could be a typo for ("Aym commeth foorth with three heads, the first like a serpent, the second like a man, the third like a cat", but nothing to suggest that s/he is the "president of hell"). - Iridescenti 19:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment Actually, I believe Amy is there as Demon No.61. --Folantin 19:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Doh! (slaps head) Still weak delete though, unless the others are to get entries as well - I can't imagine anyone ever searching for "Amy" in this context. - Iridescenti 19:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• Strong delete. The given feminine name (see Amy for info) doesn't match up to what this would be, so while it's a long shot (!), I call WP:BOLLOCKS. --Dennisthe2 22:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • You do realize that my previous comment and Tikiwont's comments pretty well establish this as not a hoax, right? hateless 22:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, I do take exception, as she's taking my stepmother's job, sir. =^_^= --Dennisthe2 00:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
    • OK, I just re-read your note. Hateless, please clarify: is Goetia a fictional realm, or...? --Dennisthe2 00:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Goetia's an archaic word for making pacts with demons (as opposed to the devil himself) - eg the Devil might want your eternal soul in exchange for riches, but Amy would only want a small part of your soul in exchange for light housekeeping chores. Oversimplifying but you get the picture. - Iridescenti 02:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

In that case, that's out of my realm. Vote retract, I abstain from a vote. --Dennisthe2 15:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom Garcia-Fons 23:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

  Seems to be a sock-puppet, whose only edits have been today, to a string of AfDs. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 23:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep or Merge - The nomination is essentially an "I've never heard of it" argument. I do believe that the list of stubs related to demons has gotten a bit excessive, but this is valid, verified information (and fairly well known in the circles familiar with the references cited) and should not simply be deleted. I think Demons in Goetia could be an alternative in the event of a merge, which would allow for slightly more information (such as is contained in this stub) to be provided above a mere list. Such a list, by the way, would be superfluous, since the list is already there in the Goetia article, which I assume those who voted for deletion based on WP:BOLLOCKS and the like seem to have missed. To single out one of these listed and sourced 72 for deletion doesn't seem reasonable. ◄Zahakiel► 03:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
• keep or merge We cant merge all of the demons, because a few are quite notable in their own right. The ones that have attracted less modern attention do not really justify articles, ass there is not that much to say, although there technically are sources. So I agree with the solution by Zahakiel, with separate articles when appropriate. DGG 08:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment This is probably the best solution. We need to sort out what to do with the Goetia list of demons as a whole rather than piecemeal like this. Some of the spirits listed such as Astaroth and Belial occur frequently elsewhere in Western culture, many of the others only appear in Johann Weyer's book. This needs to be treated like fiction, with the significant names having their own articles and the rest being catalogued on a single page as "Minor demons in goetia" (or whatever). --Folantin 08:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment. My suggestion would be to have a list that treats all of them briefly in the context of Goetia, using {{details}} links to point to the full articles on those with independent notability. —Celithemis 11:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Merge - into list. Nothing here that asserts individual notability, but a list of these demons looks appropriate. Though I'm not sure WP:BIO is the right thing to talk about here...that guideline is for people, you know...but individually Amy probably does not pass WP:N. So listify. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 10:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - For the people voting to merge or listify, note that this list already exists in the Goetia article, and there's a fair amount of information on each of the 72 that just collapsing into a single article would make it very long. My "keep or merge" vote above was holding out "merge" as a distant second choice to keeping, and after further consideraiton I really do not think that is the best solution. IF they are merged, several names are still going to need their own articles (possibly this one as well) for the amount of information provided, but that is a topic for a talk page (e.g., the Goetia talk area) not an AfD discussion on one of the 72. Folantin's idea of having an article "Minor Demons in Goetia" would probably work for cleaning up the ones that are merely stubs and not mentioned anywhere else, but again this would need to be discussed on a talk page somewhere else, not here. ◄Zahakiel► 18:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete or Merge - I think it would be best to shove this into another article/list until some sources (i.e. not online demon libraries with the apparent intent to market their products) and it doesn't fail WP:CB. Until then, I still vote delete. Deepdesertfreman 03:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC) (clarification... I am casting my actual vote here. The above opinion was to spark debate. Don't count as second vote)

Comment - Since you are the one who nominated the article for deletion, that is already an implied "delete" vote. I am curious what "products" you are talking about here, though; and as for the WP:CB statement, that is still just an "I've never heard of it" argument; the topic is one of a set of subjects in a number of non-trivial sources (not just "online" lists, but historically significant documents about mysticism, pacts and so on) that are mentioned in the article already. ◄Zahakiel► 15:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Some solution should be devised for all 72 of the "demons" in Ars Goetia, probably including a wee bit of merging. Think of this as one card out of a deck. Would we address all cards in the deck simultaneously or pick them off one at a time? -- Black Falcon 20:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

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.