Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mythology

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Mythology. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Mythology|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Mythology. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mythology/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Mythology

Aha Han

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

I see nothing mentioning this anywhere and cannot find anything to back up anything in this article. Fails WP:GNG. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 12:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mythology-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The main source for this article was the Dictionary of Turkish Legends, which was deleted (in what I think is not a great move) because the linked PDF was hosted on Wikipedia. See p. 24. I don't know how to effectively search for reliable sources in Turkish to find any more useful info. -- Recon rabbit 14:46, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ningen (folklore)

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

Insignificant topic, doesn't have much notable impact Thegoofhere (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I found this source by WSJ, [1], though it's behind a paywall. Also, See WP:WSJ

Thegoofhere (talk) 22:56, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 5. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mythology and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 23:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep for failure to state a deletion rationale.The article has multiple sources, including a peer-reviewed academic article and an article in Daily Mirror (which is a no-consensus at WP:RSP), plus a mention in a book. There could be a policy-based argument but the nomination statement doesn't even try. Oblivy (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, (COI: I'd contributed to the article). I think that the first source (a paper by the University of Tokyo with two pages of related bibliography) are enough to prove the subject notability. Alexcalamaro (talk) 04:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atibala

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Most of the detail is unsourced and possibly WP:OR (e.g. "He had been created by Ravana as a test-tube baby."). Only sourced detail "Atibala was a servant of Lanka king Ravana." can be added on Ravana page if it can be verified, but the current detail fails verification from the source - source says Atibala was Yama in form of a sannyasin. Asteramellus (talk) 02:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Asteramellus (talk) 02:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mythology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 02:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Domdaniel

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

No significant coverage for this fictional place. SL93 (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Doesn't have enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE is hard here, because domdaniel is also a word meaning "a den of inquiry",[2]. There's also a WP:NOTDIC issue here where the article just extracts WP:OR of various times the word has been used. It seems to have been coined in One Thousand and One Nights, so there could be a valid WP:ATD as a search term. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of mythological places as an WP:Alternative to deletion. This is a relevant place in two works of fiction, which is referenced in a number of younger works of fiction as can be seen in the number of primary and secondary sources both present in the article and especially those appearing in the WP:BEFORE search. This role and connectivity in my view goes beyond a dictionary definition, so this should have some place on Wikipedia. Presence in Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable indicates that as well. There's a rather extensive discussion in this paper on the Thalaba version. Oriental influences in the English Literature of the early nineteenth century, p. 25, discusses the Arabian Nights - Thalaba connection. Britain and the Muslim World, p. 132 has an interesting one-sentence-comparison to Hogwarts. The secondary sources I've seen in a brief search are short on the Domdaniel beyond the specific work of Thalaba, so I don't think a stand-alone article is warranted so far, but deletion would be a loss. Daranios (talk) 07:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

....or weak keep concurring with Hannes Röst. At least Babylonian Influence on the Bible and Popular Beliefs has an additional background on etymology beyond what's in the other sources or the Merriam-Webster entry. Daranios (talk) 15:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mythology-related deletion discussions. Daranios (talk) 07:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : The article is severely unsourced, but there are many sources about the subject in Google Books and on the web. Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak Keep : the problem with subjects like this is that we require reliable secondary sources, not just usage of the term in primary works of fiction/poems/tales. So preferably a (scholarly) discussion about the place, not just evidence that the word is used by someone. I found [3] [4] [5] (probably there are more) on top of the three sources found above which is not as in depth as I would like but at least there are multiple independent secondary sources on this topic which should be enough for a short article. --hroest 13:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]