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 delete. Cirt (talk) 12:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Life imitating art

[edit]

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

I have to be perfectly honest, I was considering not nominating this to AFD and just going with the speedy deletion reason. This seems to be OR! However, it's got enough references in it to give me pause. Taking to AFD for review. Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 11:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A notable phrase and concept. That said, I see a lot of original research on the page. This article needs to be improved, not deleted.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 14:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete! Is art not reality? What has Sahra Palin, Motorcycle sales, or Arnold Schwarzenegger got to do with O. Wild? I cannot see any reference making any case that Wild's concept is used by anybody. If not deleting this strange list of ideas immidiatly, it should redirect to Oscar Wild Mootros (talk) 15:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books shows plenty of discussion, and Scholar does too. It is an interesting concept, best illustrated by examples. The article gives a number, and is likely to expand as other editors see other examples. This kind of article draws people into Wikipedia and encourages them to explore. There is plenty of room for expansion, no reason to delete. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Since the article does not meet any other reason for deletion, I assume the reason to consider deletion is that the subject fails to meet guideline for notability, specifically that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The phrase, however, appears to be a notable concept as the above searches show. Certainly there should be no problem finding sources for any particular statement in the article. The challenge may be in finding Significant coverage, meaning sources that address the subject directly in detail. FWIW, I found several books whose main title is the phrase. Here are a few: Life imitates art: encounters between family therapy and literature , life imitating art and art imitating life , Life imitating art. I do agree with the view that the article could use alot of improvement.--Work permit (talk) 03:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (X! · talk) · @260 · 05:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:DICTIONARY. The article is nothing more than a definition of the term followed by an "in popular culture" list consisting of indiscriminate trivia and cruft, neither of which are valid reasons to establish an article on Wikipedia. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article is just a list of trivia combined with WP:OR/WP:SYNTH --MaxEspinho (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:DICTIONARY --Joe Decker (talk) 19:29, 27 February 2010 (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.