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. Accusing participants in an AFD of having a certain point of view is not a reason to keep an article. --Coredesat 05:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moloch in popular culture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Trivia collection. Unacceptable per WP:FIVE and WP:NOT#IINFO. As a cultural phenomenon, the main article does an excellent job of containing scholarly commentary. Users worried about the main article should know that I watch it and will keep it clean. Eyrian 18:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Keep. Not because the page has any reasonable quality. I agree with the sentiments of the person seeking deletion. HOWEVER, if this article is deleted, the fancruft folk will want to put it in the main article -- which is where it originally was. But in the main article it detracts from the relatively good content that this there. I believe that deleting this fancruft page will cause a deterioration in the main article. So, I say keep it. --Blue Tie 22:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• As I said, I'd be glad to keep the article clean, as I now watch it. --Eyrian 23:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. I note that the above keep is based on WP:BHTT#Better_here_than_there. Bigdaddy1981 00:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - directory of loosely associated items. A collection of every time the word "Moloch" appears in a comic book or video game is not an encyclopedia article. "People will want to add it to the main article" is not a valid criterion for keeping. Otto4711 00:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 20:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (without prejudice to later renomination) per the comments of User:Melsaran and myself at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Eyrian. The nominator is, broadly speaking, right that wikipedia should be purged of inappropriate trivia: however he and the other delete voters in this and a string of related AfDs are immediatists. The right approach is to give the matter considered thought, to review these types of articles with TLC and to extract from them the items that do have merit, and with what's left to consider whether a transwiki is a better option than outright deletion from the world wide web. The greatest weakness of wikipedia is the lack of respect that some members of the community have for the hard work of others, and an inability to see - or even to seek - the diamonds in the rough. AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Request to closing admin if this closes as a delete would you, instead, move it (protected if you feel it necessary) to a sub-page of User:AndyJones? AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (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.