Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Monument Mythos - Wikipedia
- 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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The Monument Mythos (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)
Appears to fail notability guidelines. Most of the article’s sources are student newspapers by the author’s own description. Could not find reliable significant coverage in my search. Has been previously deleted. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Has been previously deleted.
... when? Has been previously kept....Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:The_Monument_Mythos... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]- It was kept as a draft. It was nominated for deletion as a draft by a non-good-faith actor. But that is not evidence that there was a consensus that the subject is notable after someone challenged its notability. Drafts are not deleted for lack of notability so a draft being kept does not mean that editors thought that the subject is notable. —Alalch E. 15:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, maybe, but the page was discussed and the then-draft found promising by some users, whereas deletion was NOT discussed, so that stating ’has been previously deleted’ here (an AfD venue, where consensus is what matters) is misleading imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that's is misleading. The decision to keep the draft does not matter at all in either direction. —Alalch E. 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, maybe, but the page was discussed and the then-draft found promising by some users, whereas deletion was NOT discussed, so that stating ’has been previously deleted’ here (an AfD venue, where consensus is what matters) is misleading imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, right. The MfD. yikes. Babysharkboss2!! (No Life 'Til Leather) 13:19, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It was kept as a draft. It was nominated for deletion as a draft by a non-good-faith actor. But that is not evidence that there was a consensus that the subject is notable after someone challenged its notability. Drafts are not deleted for lack of notability so a draft being kept does not mean that editors thought that the subject is notable. —Alalch E. 15:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Babysharkboss2!! (Nomad Vagabond) 14:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be helpful if, as one of the contributors to the page, you could find time to explain why you think deletion is not necessary. Thank you in advance. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Babysharkboss2 (pinging you to increase chances you read this). Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, yeah. Anyway, this has etiquette enough sources and there are still sources to be added. It survived MfD (Even after one very...passionate user wanted it gone). So i'd like to keep it. Babysharkboss2!! (Nomad Vagabond) 12:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Babysharkboss2 (pinging you to increase chances you read this). Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be helpful if, as one of the contributors to the page, you could find time to explain why you think deletion is not necessary. Thank you in advance. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: This is about all there is [1] for sourcing and it's not enough. Rest of what's used is marginally reliable sources per Source Highlighter, so not much of anything we can use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: I am satisfied with the existing coverage, see GNews please. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: significant coverage in reliable sources includes Collider (twice) but also The Gamer among other things and I would consider https://fnewsmagazine.com/2022/01/ghosts-in-the-machine-the-star-spangled-monsters-of-mister-manticores-the-monument-mythos/ and the article in the The Signal perfectly acceptable sources too.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I find F Newsmagazine to be a very good, professional-level, outlet in the areas of culture and critique of visual media. —Alalch E. 14:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I don't find any substantial, reliable sources for this. Most of what is here are student publications, including F Newsmagazine, which is a student publication of the Arts Institute of Chicago. The coverage in Collider and The Gamer is limited to a few paragraphs in a page with many other entries, and formulaic in style. AKA: promotional. Searching turns up lots of TikTok and other bits, none which have any content about the "show". Lamona (talk) 03:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sudent or college newspapers, but high-quality (and award-winning, for one of them) reliable ones. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep + add further improvements - shJunpei :3 12:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This page puts some major parts of the Monument Mythos right into the first segment. There should be an area marked "Plot" for that. - shJunpei :3 12:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep in addition to the sources cited above it's an exemplar of the emerging subgenre of analog horror. The series just wrapped up last year. In "J-HORROR Y ESTÉTICA VHS EN EL ANALOG HORROR DE YOUTUBE" by Javier Acevedo Nieto,[2] The Monument Mythos is given as an example of the growing popularity of analog horror. There are several articles from reliable sources that are admittedly about ARGs, but give The Monument Mythos a key place in the genre.[3] There are some more niche horror publications that give the series more coverage.[4] The article needs to be cleaned up, but the sources are out there. Ted the Caver was an even more niche online horror series, and it is still being seriously discussed, Rjjiii (talk) 04:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Rjjiii, it all depends on the existence of reliable sources that can establish notability. Which ones do you believe provides SIGCOV? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Below are the approximate word counts for just the content explicitly about The Monument Mythos. I checked the sources mentioned here and cited in the article, and left off anything with less than a hundred words about the subject:
- The Horror Fam page has about 1,400 words but is more of an editorial. Rjjiii (talk) 05:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Rjjiii, it all depends on the existence of reliable sources that can establish notability. Which ones do you believe provides SIGCOV? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 19:50, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- merge to analog horror. there doesnt seem to be enough secondary sources notability for a seperate article, but it’s solid enough as an example of the genre which has notability itself. In fact, I see it is already given in that article as an example of the genre. No need for the split page. Absurdum4242 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2024 (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.