Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human spirit

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 snowball keep based on Colonel Warden's rewrite. Most of the early participants (who were referring to the article's old version) have struck their opinions favoring deletion, so the agreement is practically unanimous here. JamieS93 18:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Human spirit

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

This is a short, personal essay about the human spirit. It is entirely unreferenced; nothing of significance links to it; it has been problematic ever since it was created. I cannot see how any of the content can be salvaged for an encyclopaedic purpose. I can envisage a Wikipedia article about the human spirit, but it would (a) overlap greatly with soul and (particularly) will to power, and (b) it would have to be a completely fresh start. Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 13:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Essay. Joe Chill (talk) 14:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed to Keep: Per improvements. Joe Chill (talk) 01:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's an essay at best mapping a personal path but not supported by references for the steps along the way. It's hard to see how this could be moulded to become an encyclopaedic article. AllyD (talk) 14:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, for all the reasons already stated. Probably original research as well. There may be an appropriate place for this essay, but I don't think that place is Wikipedia. I note that the page started life as a redirect, with some disagreement over which page it should redirect to, before it was hijacked by this essay. --Deskford (talk) 15:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Previous opinion now irrelevant as the article has been rewritten from scratch. I'm not convinced the new version as it stands is a useful or viable article. Perhaps it could/should be merged into the relevant secton of Spirit or Human nature, but if someone were to show that there is potential to expand the current article I might change my view. --Deskford (talk) 12:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but if the creator wishes, then userfy to him/her. Blodance (talk) 16:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with right to userfy, per essay. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 17:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Rewritten, WP:AGF NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 02:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or if creator chooses, userfy. This looks like an essay and it doesn't seem to be usable as an article. RawrMage (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep A fresh start does not require deletion nor any bureaucracy. Allow me to demonstrate... Colonel Warden (talk) 00:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...I have now completely rewritten the article from a good source. The above discussion is now moot. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the total rewrite since nomination that addressed the nom's concerns and turned an essay into an article that bears little resemblance to what was first sent to AFD. I wonder how a concept so heavily covered in books and even news could be seen as non-notable. The potential for improvement seemed quite clear. Nice to see that someone was willing to actually fix a surmountable concern through regular editing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some actually tried to destroy the human spirit. Sigh. Click Google News, Google books, and Google Scholars, and you get plenty of coverage of this concept. Can be defined as various things. Article can be greatly expanded. Dream Focus 03:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The rewrite is worthy of inclusion and can be expanded from a stub. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 05:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Switched position since the article has been reworked. Blodance (talk) 10:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball Keep per re write by the Colonel. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:36, 21 January 2010 (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.