Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thirties poets

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 keep. By the way, this should have been at WP:RFD, but no matter. --²¹⁰physicq (c) 01:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thirties poets

Incorrect use of redirect? SERSeanCrane 00:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep as redirect. The Auden Group says that they were also known as the Thirties poets, so redirecting there is not unreasonable. Googling doesn't produce millions of hits, but those that come up refer to Spender, Auden etc. What's the harm in having this as a redirect? Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 01:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as redirect. It's a fairly concise term for a group, it's common in those circles, it's scholarly. Philippe Beaudette 01:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as redirect per Squiddy and Philippe Beaudette. Newyorkbrad 02:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - theoretically this should be handled at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion; however it looks like there's a general consensus here that there's no reason to delete this (and go through the hassle of moving everything over there for a similar discussion). SkierRMH 02:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I won't vote because I'm the person who created the redirect page, and it's not my call whether or not to keep it. I created it because there was a "red" link to the term "Thirties poets" on a page that I was working on, and the phrase is in fairly wide use. I don't have strong feelings about keeping or deleting the page, but there are books and articles titled "The Thirties Poets" or similar terms. Googling the phrase in quotes "thirties poets" produces some standard examples. Unless there's a strong reason to delete that I haven't seen, I guess I would say it does some good to keep it. Macspaunday 16:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to elaborate my reasoning on nominating the article for deletion. When I came across the re-direct I expected to be taken to a list and/or a nice summary of popular poets in the 30's. I was not aware the Auden Group was synonymous with '30's poets' and I have no problem with that. I simply nominated the article because I feel the term is inherently misleading. Perhaps the page should be disambig'ed? SERSeanCrane 20:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the list of linked names in the first paragraph of the page that the redirect goes to is enough to serve the purpose? It's impossible to create a definitive list of "Thirties poets" beyond the obivous ones listed on the target page. It would be possible to add a few dozen other poets who wrote in the 1930s, but I think the term "thirties poets" is more or less synonymous with "Auden Group". Still, it might be an idea to have category pages of "British poets of the 1920s", "British poets of the 1930s", etc., if those categories don't exist already. Macspaunday 21:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep...and shouldn't this be over at WP:RfD? The article states that the group went under the names of "Thirties Poets", so it's valid. If there were a list of poets from the 30s, I don't think it'd be under this name. --UsaSatsui 22:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My impression is that everyone, including the editor who orginally suggested the deletion, agrees on keep. Is it possible to close the discussion? Macspaunday 23:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please close the discussion. I jumped the gun on this nom, my apologies! SERSeanCrane 00:00, 25 January 2007 (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.