Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ley tunnel

: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. no consensus for deletion JForget 12:56, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

=[[Ley tunnel]]=

:{{la|Ley tunnel}} – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{findsources|Ley tunnel}})

This seems to be basically OR as the phrase 'Ley tunnel' seems to be rarely used - I can find one instance of its use in Google books, the one [http://books.google.co.uk/books?rlz=1C1GGLS_enGB320GB320&sourceid=chrome&q="ley%20tunnel"&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wp here by Nigel Pennick (3rd down when I looked)]. The sources that I can check do not mention the phrase although one does mention a tunnel along a ley. My book Ley Lines in Question doesn't mention ley tunnels either. Dougweller (talk) 18:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep The article is sound and appears to take a researched view. It describes a phenomena of mythical tunnels which I am familiar with ... but have never heard a name for it. The problem of the title of the article is a difficult one as I had never heard the phrase. Maybe "Mythical tunnels in the UK" or something similar should be the title, if we can avoid OR issues.

Victuallers (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment: A lot of these 'tunnels' are very real, and at least one is described as a drainage conduit. I can see where you are coming from, but retitling itself wouldn't work and I think we'd end up with a very different article. Dougweller (talk) 05:24, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm taking the liberty of moving this out of Science and Technology to Society. It's more of a folklore and mythology subject than anything else.--RDBury (talk) 03:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep There are certainly enough sources. I'm not sure what the right title should be, but it does seem to be a distinct subject. DGG ( talk ) 19:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • What is a distinct subject? There is no subject called 'ley tunnels', and given that, what is the article about? It isn't just about mythical tunnels. It might be possible to create an article about mythical tunnels, but this isn't it as a number of the tunnels are very real and, as I said, some of the 'tunnels' aren't tunnels at all. Dougweller (talk) 04:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm thinking this might be the start of a decent "Tunnels in Folklore" or "Tunnels in Popular Culture" type article. I do think some rename and refocus is needed, and those are my suggestions. GRBerry 18:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 13:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep Notable. A possible retitling can be sorted out. ChildofMidnight (talk) 15:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
  • The content is enyclopedia, even if the name isn't. Rename to a better title such as Tunnels in folklore, and then keep. -- The Anome (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. I find it hard to believe that this phenomenon does not have a common English name. In Norwegian it's called a "lønngang" (lønn = "hidden / secret", and gang = passage), Swedish "lönngång". As the article describes, the passages may be real or just a result of rumours / folklore. Still, a well defined subject from what I can tell. decltype (talk) 11:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Question - given that we have an article Secret passage do you still think this article should be kept? Dougweller (talk) 21:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

:::To me they are different subjects and if you check the articles they cover different material. The Ley tunnels article is about tunnels that appear in folklore, Secret passages is about passages (usually within a building so they can't be called tunnels) that are supposed to be secret. It's kind of a contradiction to combine the two; if something is in folklore then everyone knows about it and if everyone knows about it can't be secret. It's possible that Ley tunnels could be merged with another article but Secret passages isn't it.--RDBury (talk) 05:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

:::That complicates matters. There is some overlap, and "connection with the more esoteric notions of channels or paths of earth energy" is not really a characteristic of a typical "lønngang". decltype (talk) 15:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete, or, if there is any useful content here that's not already in that article, merge with secret passage. That is the common English name for what is described in this article, and the linking of secret passages with ley lines seems like a piece of synthesis that is unsupported by reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

: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.