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 delete‎. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional city (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)

This is a major piece of WP:OR. My BEFORE suggests that the topic itself may be notable (stress on may, but [1] and [2] among others seem promising), but sadly we need to WP:TNT what we have and start from scratch. There are unrefenced parts, parts that are effectively unreferenced (what is "Nesselrath (2005)"?) and parts that appear referenced but aren't (ex. the entire 'Purposes' section is sourced to [3], but verification shows that only the last sentence, and arguably not even all of it, can be referenced there - it is effectively pure OR with a fig leaf of "look, this one article mentions somethign slightly related so let's add this as an example and a reference and make it look good"). The same problem applies to second paragraph in the lead, which makes ORish general claims and has references to some works about specific fictional cities. The second half of the article is a fancrufty list of "notable examples" (notable according to whom?). If we feel generous, WP:ATD could be redirecting this to List of fictional settlements (not that this list is particularly impressive, sigh - but that's for another discussion). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Architecture. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Regardless of whether the overall topic is notable or not, this current article is just too full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH to be retained. None of the information here is actually based on any sources that discuss the actual idea of "Fictional Cities" as a topic, there are just a few (largely terrible) sources on specific places that are then being synthed together to make up a topic. And then there is the fact that this article is trying to tie places from mythology and folklore into the same topic as places that were deliberately created as the setting for a piece of current pop culture without any actual sources linking the two concepts, which is just a huge mess of original research. In short, nothing written in this article is actually based on reliable sources on the topic at all. No prejudice against actually creating a new article after deletion, or using the article title as a redirect (I note that this was originally created as redirect to Fictional location for example) after deletion, but such a blatant piece of original research like this should not be retained. Rorshacma (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• It's a citation of a work by Heinz-Günther Nesselrath in our Atlantis article where it says that some people thought it fictional, indicating that part of this is just copy and paste work. Uncle G (talk) 20:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• The addition of the town of Walmington-on-Sea 9 years into the article's life doesn't engender much confidence. Uncle G (talk) 20:19, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Should perhaps have been a "List of fictional cities", but it's largely unsourced/OR. We don't need an article on fictional cities, when the list of the things is longer than the prose that should describe them in the lead. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's probably a notable subject as Cities in fiction but this is WP:TNT, "blow it up and start over" material. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:OR. There might be a valid redirect target, but there is nothing to WP:PRESERVE. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete full of WP:OR, this page could be remade with proper sourcing. Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is Synth or OR, you pick. Jacona (talk) 18:56, 9 November 2023 (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.