- 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 merge to Matterhorn. Consensus is to do a "selective merge" of the most relevant, referenced content. RL0919 (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- List of references to the Matterhorn (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)
Located in the Category:Places in popular culture, this is really just a Matterhorn in popular culture article, although I'll admit - the name is more fitting (honest) than many others that we have recently been cleaning, as they are all just that, lists of mentions. Like others, however, it fails WP:LISTN, WP:GNG and Wikipedia:IPC, and sports a lot of unreferenced mentions. I doubt there is much we can salvage from this (the Matterhorn article doesn't even have a 'in popular culture' section', and this article is just an off hand see also). I am afraid it needs to go as a TV trope like indiscrimate list that's outside the scope of Wikipedia. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep (as contributor). There is enough published material about this topic (cultural references to the Matterhorn, and not just the Matterhorn), including books (such as The Printed Matterhorn), so it complies with WP:LISTN and WP:GNG (not sure about Wikipedia:IPC but it is not a guideline so there is no point in discussing it here). Zach (Talk) 11:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Printed Matterhorn is not even used as a reference. There is a slight chance this could be totally rewritten into a prose-based analysis using this work as a prose article Matterhorn in popular culture , IF this book is relevant, but in this case, WP:TNT treatment applies to the current list. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 15:07, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- No doubt that the current article/list is far from good. However, you cited WP:TNT (which is an essay, not a guideline), so may I cite another one: WP:Overzealous deletion? I think it would be a fair thing to do. Zach (Talk) 19:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Selective merge to Matterhorn. The article is in the usual listcruft trivia format and fails WP:GNG, but some of the content (not the logos, the "Matterhorn of X" stuff, etc.) would fit, converted into prose, into a section about cultural significance in the article about the mountain. Sandstein 10:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Selective merge to Matterhorn per Sandstein; some of the info seems salvageable, but this topic does not merit a separate article due to failing WP:INDISCRIMINATE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:48, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Selective merge to Matterhorn - and by "selective" I mean the coins and paintings for an "In culture" section, and the list of mountains actually named after the Matterhorn (NOT the nicknames) as a separate section. The filmography is already there. The rest is rather crufty. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:27, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Selective merge to improve the merge target article; makes sense. North America1000 15:08, 7 April 2022 (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.