Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Da Vinci Code Paintings
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:54, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
AFAICT, this violates the WP:NOR policy. Alphax τεχ 09:43, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- That book was pretty good, but seems to have caused nightmares for Wiki editors by claiming to be rooted in fact. Orignal Research - Delete - --JiFish(Talk/Contrib)
- Gibberings. Delete. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:24, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Abstain for now. I've never read the Damned Thing. Are the paintings in fact discussed in the book? If so, it isn't "original research," the paintings discussed surely are notable, and a properly wikified page reporting Brown's speculations about them would be arguably more meritorious than 99% of the other fancruft I still would happily keep. -- Smerdis of Tlön 13:39, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - this article isn't so much about the paintings or even just reporting Brown's speculations, but is instead an attempt to evaluate whether or not those speculations were correct. Therefore, it is original research. A list of the paintings referenced in the book and synopses of Brown's speculations would belong in the The Da Vinci Code article, but the content of this page is most certainly not encyclopedic. -- Jonel 14:57, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete pure speculation. I've deleted it before during an RC patrol last night as a recreation of deleted material. Let it run it's course this time, so we can show the creator the concencus. An article discussing Brown's speculations about the paintings belongs in The Da Vinci Code and has merit. This hasn't. Mgm|(talk) 16:48, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. If someone wanted to produce a List of artwork in The Da Vinci Code (or create same as a section within The Da Vinci Code) that would likely be acceptable. Original research about claims in a work of fiction isn't. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 19:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete original research. JamesBurns 11:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.