Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Of Mice and Men in popular culture (2nd nomination)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 11:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of Mice and Men in popular culture

Of Mice and Men in popular culture (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)

Mostly unreferenced TVtropic listcruft (tagged with refimprove since 2008, and already during AfD 13 years ago called "just a cluttered trivial dumping ground."). Not linked from anywhere except as a see also or part of Steinbeck's navigational template. Fails - take your pick - a myriad of policies, guidelines and like: as an 'in popular culture' article,

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, Popular culture, and United States of America. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --Vaco98 (talk) 11:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is a list of every minor even vague reference. Wikipedia is not meant to be a comprehensive list of every possible call back, mention or vague citing of a work that has occured, no matter how minor. Also note that saying "the best laid plans of mice and men" etc. in a scholarly article may not even be a reference to Steinbeck. It was Burns who wrote a poem that mentions "the best laid plans of mice and men" over 100 years before Steinbeck. So not even all uses of "of mice and men" are neccessarily in any way alluding to the book at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The only included source that actually says anything about the overall use of references to the book in popular culture is the first listed one from the NYT, and that consists entirely of the one sentence that is quoted in this article. The remainder of the article is nothing but non-notable trivia items. Rorshacma (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all.
  WP:PRESERVE here. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, purely original research, textbook example of
  WP:NOTTVTROPES. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:11, 8 May 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.