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 no consensus to delete, leaning towards consensus to keep, after extended time for discussion. However, the article may benefit from retitling to List of lost lands, Lost continent, or List of lost continents. bd2412 T 22:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lost lands[edit]

Lost lands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Odd mish-mash of real, mythological and fictional sunken lands. Although it could be split into at least two articles that clearly distinguish between history and myth, this would be redundant as most of the content is already covered in other articles. –dlthewave ☎ 03:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The main problem with the article is lack of refs. Yes it needs tidying a bit but providing sources are added and the distinction between real and mythological is maintained, it’s fine. Mccapra (talk) 05:17, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - as has already been said, it needs sources but I'm sure those can be found and that's not a reason to delete it. It's clearly a notable subject, I've got at least 3 books covering it and I think I have this. Doug Weller talk 10:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the subject? Do the books cover both mythological places such as Atlantis and real, non-legendary ones like Doggerland? –dlthewave ☎ 11:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Doug Weller and CAPTAIN RAJU. Mosaicberry (talk • contribs) 11:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep There's not a discernable reason to delete in the nomination. See the Encyclopedia of Fantasy for a model example. Andrew D. (talk) 11:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 23:12, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 23:12, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm not exactly sure what this is supposed to be. Is this a "list of lost lands?" Anyways, the problem with notability here is the definition - what exactly is a "lost land?" There is at least some geographic support for part of the definition mentioned in the article [1] but my WP:BEFORE search gets lost in a swamp of music festivals and board games, and the definition also appears to extend at least colloquially to lands that were ruled by a power and no longer are. There are some huge potential WP:OR/WP:SYNTH/WP:TRIVIA/general WP:GNG issues with this article, hence my delete !vote, but obviously no issue if someone tries to clean it up and demonstrate notability. SportingFlyer T·C 03:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per SportingFlyer's reasons. The lead lacks references that define the title and scope of the article. --mikeu ^talk 13:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Dratify The page requires more work. It can be re-written and republished. Laosilika (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As discernible when following the copious ((main)) links at the section headings, this material is already well bundled in units that make sense. There is no need for an additional forced mash-up of Beringia and Shangri-La under one fuzzy term. In fact, replacing the article with a disambiguation pointing at Mythical continents, Submerged continent, & c. might not be a bad solution. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/draftify This is a synthesized/OR mish-mash of not just real and imaginary places but a list of unrelated authors that apparently talked about them in one way or another. This is not a coherent enough article with narrow inclusion criteria for a single encyclopedic topic. Agree with Elmidae that a dab to the main articles could work but the lists needn't be combined. Reywas92^Talk 04:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "Lost continents" would be a valid article subject referring to the mythical likes of Mu, Lemuria, Atlantis, and other examples from non-Western culture. Meanwhile, List of mythological places could maybe be divided into subcategories (continent, country, city, etc). But this is just too vague and doesn't include much that's worth saving. I certainly wouldn't object to a redirect if people think of a sensible target (maybe List of mythological places - a lot of things like mythical continents and lost continents exist only as redirects, so redirecting to them would not be appropriate). --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:11, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep rationale for deletion... What is the reason to delete in the nomination? Seems the nominator does not like the fusion of myth and reality in the article? The subject matter is notable. WP:ATD. Needs sourcing Lubbad85 (☎) 22:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that the fusion of myth and reality is not supported by sources. I didn't explain it very well in the nomination but I agree with SportingFlyer, mikeu and Reywas92. Although various items in the list might be referred to as "lost lands", we don't seem to have a source that treats all of them as a single topic. The extremely broad definition in the opening paragraph (including planets and cartographic errors?) is entirely unsourced. We write articles about topics, not semi-related things that happen to share the same name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlthewave (talk • contribs) 22:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lubbad85 (☎) 22:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Perfectly valid list article. Just rename it to List of lost lands, and its fine. Plenty of blue links, aids in navigation as a good list article should. No other target exist for all the valid information. Dream Focus 02:32, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep There's not a discernable reason to delete in the nomination. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a topic that if it were deleted, it will still need to be covered somewhere on Wikipedia as this is a real phenomenon -- not lost lands themselves, but writers who invent and write about lost lands. The article lists many such writers and their inventions, and provides multiple sources that are about those writers, for example:
  • L. Sprague de Camp and Willy Ley, Lands Beyond, Rinehart & Co., New York, 1952.
  • L. Sprague de Camp, Lost Continents: The Atlantis Theme in History, Science, and Literature, Dover Publications, 1970.
  • Raymond H. Ramsay, No Longer on the Map: Discovering Places that Never Were, Ballantine, 1972.

I have seen other sources as well on this topic. Multiple book-length treatments of the topic make it notable. -- GreenC 14:11, 12 May 2019 (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.