Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fertility symbol

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 Speedy keep per WP:SNOW, even nominator doesn't think article needs deletion. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 00:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fertility symbol

Fertility symbol (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This was a PROD with a tag removed, but it should still be considered for deletion. Personally I think it's OK and the sort of thing that belongs in Wikipedia, but needs expanding and sourcing. Onthaveanaccountcreateone 12:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep Can't see another article that covers the same (off a quick search) and there is no question it's got potential (based on the 'sturdy' Google test). Pedro |  Chat  13:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep While looking for a possible merge target, I came across Fertility rite, Fertility goddess and Fertility deity which redirects to Fertility god (which doesn't make sense since a deity can be a God or Goddess, obviously). I think the best outcome would be one good article about Fertility and religion that encompasses all these topics (and would need more information than is currently in any of them), but I don't know how to address that in regards to this AFD. So I'm voting to keep the article, with no prejudice against merging the information to an article with a wider scope if one is found or created. Propaniac 13:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not so sure about that title as a quick delve reveals fertility symbols are associated with wedding cakes, easter (originally pagan) eggs, fig leaves and much more. I would suggest this article can stand alone, with reference off to the others you highlighted. Your point remains of course, this is a sure keep IMHO. - changed comment to speedy keep. Pedro |  Chat  14:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep AfD isn't cleanup, and it's a stub which needs a chance. Tag it as needing references. --Canley 13:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Propaniac hits it. While these several articles may be merger candidates, this is an eminently familiar trope from older anthropology and more current literature that could easily become a good article, and what's at this page now is a reasonable if inconclusive stub. Suggest speedy keep if no actual grounds for deletion are forthcoming. - Smerdis of Tlön 13:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep this si a stub that needs expansion. A merger could always be discussed, but i would tend to oppsoe it. No significant reason for deletion has been so much as mentioned in this discussion. DES (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
    • The Prod reason was a lack of sources, which should be fixed, but is not a reason to delete, and excessive specificity, which ahs bene fixed in the current version. So again, there is no current reason to delete. DES (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Reading the nomination, I don't understand why this article was even nominated for deletion. Jauerback 18:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Probably should have been tagged requesting references, rather than being brought here - the topic has potential. Keep Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep per WP:SNOW. I had actually listed this article on WP:RA a while back, and was glad to see it show up in my watchlist. Yes, it's a stub (and the original version wasn't very accurate), but it can certainly be expanded. AfD isn't really for cleanup. -- Kesh 20:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy keep--Victor falk 22:27, 18 July 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.