Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literary hope theory

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Literary hope theory

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Reviewed during new page patrol. I hope that the author saves a copy of this before it gets deleted because it would make a nice paper/essay/article somewhere other than in Wikipedia. It is purely an original work / essay and uses cites/sources only in the way that an original work / essay does. It is not a summary of what is in the sources. The reference section text does not mention the article topic even once. I thank the author for their excellent work but per numerous policies and guidelines (starting with wp:nor, then moving on to wp:v, wp:not and wp:notability) Wikipedia is not the venue for this type of work. North8000 (talk) 23:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete What I posted on the article's talk page on 7 June: "Searches on Google Scholar, Jstor, Ebsco, and Project Muse find no results for literary hope theory. The article creator appears to have written a paper full of original research about "hope in literature" and given it a title that is not used anywhere." I believe it's a student/EDU article and the creator hasn't been back to edit since 28 April. Schazjmd (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:48, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Appears this article was written for the WikiEd course: Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/School of Arts and Sciences/ENG 372 Comparative and World Literature (Spring 2022). Natg 19 (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the above: an impressive and interesting piece of work, but not a notable concept, apparently not a concept that exists in any published work, and not an encyclopaedia article. While hope in literature could very well be a notable topic, this doesn't really provide anything that could be the basis for an article on it: the essayistic tone here could probably only be overcome with significant further work by the original author, which is very unlikely to happen. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete... sadly. A well written essay that probably could be published in an academic journal with some minor modifications. However, it is an original concept and as such fails WP:OR and WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 08:05, 25 June 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.