Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strange but true

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Strange but true}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Strange but true}})

PRODded per WP:DICDEF, then deprodded by recently topic-banned {{user|Andrew Davidson}} without explanation. Just a dictionary definition without any encyclopedic information. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• Delete as unsourced dicdef. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:30, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:50, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect for now to Don_Juan_(poem)#Canto_XIV because this is where truth is stranger than fiction goes. They both seem to originate from the same poem, same sentence, by Lord Byron. “’Tis strange — but true; for truth is always strange; Stranger than fiction”. Should it ever become an article [tough] both phrases could be combined as a single topic on Byron's claims to truth and virtue ([https://read.dukeupress.edu/modern-language-quarterly/article-abstract/77/1/105/98434/Truth-Is-Stranger-Than-Fiction-Don-Juan-and-the?redirectedFrom=fulltext source]). The popular culture appropriations of these phrases are banal Byronisms. They might be discussed as a section on cultural influences but not as a main subject of the article - unless there are sources for such a discussion, I doubt it, but truth can be strange. -- GreenC 02:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per failing GNG and DICDEF. I am surprised [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WZGoDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT227&dq=%22strange+but+true%22+phrase&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjK2qDn1Ij0AhVZbysKHRb6Amg4FBDoAXoECAIQAw#v=onepage&q=%22strange%20but%20true%22%20phrase&f=false this] is the only source I can locate discussing the phrase given how widely it is used. Against redirect as this is way too tangential. Vladimir.copic (talk) 11:37, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. I would have !voted to Transwiki to Wiktionary, as much of the content seems usable. Unfortunately, per WP:ATD-TRANS, {{tq| Wiktionary no longer accepts transwikis from Wikipedia, and so is not an alternative to deletion.}} As a result, I would support deletion of a non-notable phrase that fails WP:DICDEF. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.