RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Pharaoh

Pharaoh | Result: Merge

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Keep

 * 1) A topic encompassing religion, government, and pseudohistory, to name a few things. Eminently missional if you ask me. --Ymir (talk) 09:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * As long as it doesn't turn into a general encyclopedic entry, I'm with you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:09, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Can probably be turned into something missonal, like the Priest-Kings of Atlantis and related.--JorisEnter (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) --(((The Kigel))) (talk) (mail) 00:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC) 00:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) certainly missional, as Ancient Egypt was functionally a theocracy.Tuxer (talk) 00:17, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * So merge those portions into theocracy? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) another Jewish conspiracy by (((Laurogeita Hamabost)))   (talk) 17:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Merge/redirect

 * 1) After some more thought, I think it would work better if we merged the Pharaoh page and the sections on Ancient Egypt from the Egypt page into a general page on Ancient Egypt. We have a whole category for Ancient Egypt, but no article for it, the two fit together pretty well, and there's plenty of pseudohistory to debunk. They even have a lot of the same information. Kodak (talk) 01:58, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Great idea, Kodak. I wholeheartedly agree with you. Spud (talk) 03:45, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) I'm with you guys on this one. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) We used to have an editor who was really into Ancient Egyptian stuff and we suddenly had a bunch of new articles on the topic, but not all were really necessary. Merge this and most of the others into a general Ancient Egypt article, about which there is three tons of woo per person in the world. Bicycle  wheel Toxic mowse.gif 19:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 5) Merge it, link the pseudohist articles. 00:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 6) Nerd (talk) 00:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 7) --Castaigne2 (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 8) Merge feels like the best choice here. Applesauce (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 9) Woo regarding pharaohs is clearly a subset of general ancient Egypt woo. However, I think that due to the volume, diversity and pedigree of ancient Egypt woo (even the ancient Greek had it), that topic might well deserve a dedicated page, rather than a terse subsection in the Egypt article, but that would require more content than is currently in said subsection. ScepticWombat (talk) 09:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * 23:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) I have gotten around to merging them in a new article after two months. see it here. More editing is necessary.Kodak (talk) 02:50, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Merge! 03:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) As it stands, the pharaoh article is too weak to merit a slot of its own. If expanded its missionality could merit a separate article, but until then I think it's better off as a subsection of ancient Egypt. ScepticWombat (talk) 08:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Goat

 * Maybe this article shouldn't be deleted - maybe it's missional, considering the Pharaoh could be explored as a religious figure, and so on. Maybe woo on the curse of the pharaoh or something. But I was getting the impression that this article is approaching a general encyclopedic article - and as nice as they are, and as much trivia there are about pharaoahs, I just don't think we should have general encyclopedic articles at RW... Thoughts? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In this case, a general encyclopedic article might work. There are multiple existing articles on woo around Pharaohs that don't justify merging, and the subject is tangentially related to the Bible and pseudohistory. A subheading dealing with those topics and linking to other related RW articles (eg Tutankhamun's curse, Joseph was Imhotep) would help set it right. Kodak (talk) 01:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I also see potential for a totally missional article on pharaohs. But the word here is potential. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)