Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interdimensional being: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:14, 12 July 2023

Interdimensional being

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article is mostly WP:OR with only two references: a ufology book, and a book about Buffy the Vampire Slayer which I have not otherwise attempted to verify. I have not attempted to assess notability as a literary trope or as a Spiritualist belief like that connection to the IH suggested in the Jeffrey J. Kripal source at the IH article. I brought this to AfD after a user raised a concern at Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Single_top_for_interdimensional_hypothesis/being that the article is also too similar to Interdimensional hypothesis, which is the claim that UFOs are interdimensional phenomena. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Paranormal. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I mean, it's a "thing" in literature. Using Buffy as a ref is, well, novel. Nothing I can find beyond DICDEF in sources. Oaktree b (talk) 17:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The book is an academic analysis about Buffy the Vampire Slayer. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
…so? That doesn't make it a good source. This is a literary trope at best. If you want to frame it as that, then no problem. But to try and portray it as a serious phenomenon, the old adage of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" rings true. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 12:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What we have is a dictionary definition (plus an example farm). Would a soft-redirect to wikt:interdimensional be reasonable? Walt Yoder (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While there's a small chance this could be a notable concept, the current execution (contents, references) are very subpar. WP:TNT applies. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 *:'''Delete''' I mean, it's a "thing" in literature. Using Buffy as a ref is, well, novel. Nothing I can find beyond DICDEF in sources. [[User:Oaktree b|Oaktree b]] ([[User talk:Oaktree b|talk]]) 17:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 *::The book is an academic analysis about ''Buffy the Vampire Slayer''. –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 18:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
+*:::…so? That doesn't make it a good source. This is a literary trope at best. If you want to frame it as that, then no problem. But to try and portray it as a serious phenomenon, the old adage of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" rings true.  [[User:TheInsatiableOne|TheInsatiableOne]] ([[User talk:TheInsatiableOne|talk]]) 12:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * '''Comment''' What we have is a dictionary definition (plus an example farm).  Would a soft-redirect to [[:wikt:interdimensional]] be reasonable?  [[User:Walt Yoder|Walt Yoder]] ([[User talk:Walt Yoder|talk]]) 21:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 *'''Delete'''. While there's a small chance this could be a notable concept, the current execution (contents, references) are very subpar. [[WP:TNT]] applies. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 04:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)