- 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 Reframe as Lists of poems.. There is clear consensus that the list as it stands is meaningless, as its scope is too broad. As such there is consensus to turn it into a navigational list akin to lists of books. No specific proposal has been put forward as to how the splits should be made, but that is out of scope for AfD. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- List of poems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The list's scope is way too broad for Wikipedia. Mucube (talk • contribs) 02:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Obviously poetry can't be contained in a single list, this is too indiscriminate to be useful. Reywas92Talk 03:12, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep See Category:Lists of poems. If it won't fit in a single list, then as always just split it into separate lists. The size of a length is never a valid list to delete it. Category:Lists of books by type shows an example of how often this sort of thing is done as well. Dream Focus 03:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Absurd, just because anyone is welcome make a Lists of poems doesn't mean there should be this page. How would you split this list, were it actually somewhat comprehensive? List of poems (A), List of poems (B)? Dumb, still too indiscriminate. Reywas92Talk 14:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:Lists of poems shows how the poems are already separated into various lists, so it can easily be done. Any notable poems not in one of these divided lists already, should have a place to be listed. And in list articles that are too long, are often divided in alphabetical order or by year, this does not make it indiscriminate. Dream Focus 20:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Poems are so clearly notable things, and therefore this meets WP:NLIST CT55555(talk) 04:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)][reply]
- Wrong, just because a basic concept is notable doesn't mean any list of them is appropriate for Wikipedia. We have a Lists of books but no List of books because the latter, just like this article, would be enormous and indiscriminate. Reywas92Talk 14:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. There was good reason to create this list in 2004. In 2023, it would make more sense to have list of lists of poems, on the pattern of other articles. We should discuss a transition, rather than deletion. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:SALAT "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value ..." Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I find the full quote to be more helpful
Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into sections.
. You almost persuaded me to delete based on your quote, but the full sentence makes me remain keep and advocate for splitting into sections. CT55555(talk) 15:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you propose splitting it then? Alphabetically remains too broad in scope to have any value. Category:Poems shows divisions by author, topic, etc., though these (a) aren't really a split of this list and (b) are still pretty broad in scope. A Lists of poems may be welcome, one which doesn't pretend to have countless entries, but that's no reason to keep the page being discussed here until it's been appropriately split. Reywas92Talk 15:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I did not make a proposal for how to split it, I trust others have skills and experiences that will better inform them on how to do that than I do. And I don't think this forum is the place to resolve editing decisions about the article. CT55555(talk) 15:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh come on, you can't "advocate for splitting into sections" but then not actually say how the page should be split into sections! If that's the basis to keep the article yet it cannot be feasibly done without addressing the fact that "poems" is indiscriminately broad, the vote is not a reasonable one. Dividing by topic, author, or other format does not require keeping this page when there are decent categories for this. Reywas92Talk 16:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I am permitted to argue to keep without also being required to solve all editing issues for the article at the same time. I see your passionate disagreement with me, and I hope you'll understand my reducing enthusiasm to continue discussing this, as I don't think we are going to reach consensus and the volume of both our comments here so far is starting to dominate the conversation, something which I would rather avoid. Peace. CT55555(talk) 18:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at List of Emily Dickinson poems I see much added value for the reader, by the use of Wikisource links to the text of Dickinson's short poems. That seems to me an admirable example. Where list of poems has an individual poem listed, there in some cases could be a listing compiled (depending obviously on dates, language, etc.). As far as process is concerned, the existing wikitext could be moved to the Talk page. There is future potential in this approach. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I feel like we could turn Category:Lists of poems into a page that provides added value above and beyond the category. That seems better than deleting this page and easier than trying to expand it. XOR'easter (talk) 16:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Again, a list without boundaries. Or at least, none that seem to be expressed on the talk page. All of the poems here seem to be ones that have titles. Many poems do not have titles and are referred to by their first lines - I don't see those being included but it isn't clear why not. This means that all of Emily Dickinson is excluded. I can imagine useful lists of poems by various criteria: language, country of origin, certain specific topics (nature, love, war), etc. But a list of poems that happen to have titles is not a viable list. Lamona (talk) 04:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It can be split if it becomes too long, and a search box can be added similar to List of Latin phrases. Peter James (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I think it would help if those advocating Keep offered some ideas on how this list could be better defined or how it might be split into more specific lists rather than one general list that could potentially list hundreds of articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete but support the lists of poems idea à la lists of books. This would be useful to readers, unlike this indiscriminate list which could theoretically be expanded to include every notable poem written in any language.JohnmgKing (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This list is either going to be too long and impossible to use, or too short and incomplete. As others have observed, the Lists of books article seems a good model, and Category:Lists of poems gives a good starting point for creating Lists of poems as its own article. It might even encourage people to create new useful lists (I'm thinking about maybe a list of New Zealand poems, for example). Chocmilk03 (talk) 01:28, 20 January 2023 (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.