Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mythic Tarot

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:09, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Mythic Tarot

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

Doesn't meet the general notability guideline. This tarot reading approach is trivially mentioned in news sources here. There are many books on the subject, but many of them are written by the creator, Juliet Sharman-Burke and Liz Green, and cannot be considered independent. Other books do not provide significant coverage of the subject. Furthermore, the article suffers from a promotional tone. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 00:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems only trivial mentions exist. The existing article is also unsalvageable. IRWolfie- (talk) 11:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep An odd situation (to me) lots of coverage in books [1] but mostly one author. Those books _are_ referenced in other books (see previous search). Also a lot of stuff on the interwebs, but not clear how much of that is reliable. So the books are obviously reliable, but not independent. The software and art that exists for this seems non-trivial. Eh. I think the article needs a rewrite, but the topic is likely notable. Hobit (talk) 17:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment the article is salvageable, by removing some fluff and FAQs. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Without the sources we could make a stub, but it'd be OR. IRWolfie- (talk) 12:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably Delete per IR Wolfie and nom...I agree about the lack of independence in the sources. Go Phightins! (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the author creator posted this on the talk page: I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 00:10, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for including my edit of the article "The Mythic Tarot". I took care to include all the info and most of the language from the existing article; which is therein under my sub-heading "The Mythic Tarot and Jung".

However as presently posted, the previous iteration remains entire, with my edit of the same article following it on the same page. This is redundant and unwieldly.

I did my major re-write in response to Wikipedia's red flags requesting editting, which called the original article too promotional; as it certainly was/is; also repetitive, preachy, not well written. Alas, when I tried to post my edit, it seemed to be blocked; (by the original authors?) All this I've endeavored to communicate to editors, via talk "why this page should not be deleted."

Excuse if anything herein duplicates any previous message from me. I'm just learning my way around this process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atalanta the Huntress (talk • contribs) 10:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 11:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, all.

Thanks, Jethro for copying my comment here. However, to clarity I am not the creator of this page, nor associated in any way with the creator of the Mythic Tarot deck or book. I am only the author of the complete re-write of the article which I posted first week of September, strictly in response to Wikipedia's red flags requesting an edit.

Here are some links which I've added to my edit as references re:

a) Tarot widely used by licensed psychotherapists; and

b) Mythic Tarot deck favored by such therapists / counsellors (i.e. not only by fortune tellers)

http://www.tarotschool.com/ElementalArray.html

http://www.tarottherapy.co.uk/cittprosp.htm

http://transpersonalpodcast.org/2010/09/06/hillary-anderson--using-the-tarot-in-therapy.aspx

http://columbia.academia.edu/InnaSemetsky/Papers/426808/Integrating_Tarot_Readings_Into_Counselling_and_Psychotherapy

http://gestaltarttherapy.com/1/2011_tarot_as_a_projection_technique_in_therapy_26th_november_2011_587862.html

http://donnafisherjackson.com/services/tarot.html

Here's a link to the Tarotpedia's entry on the Mythic Tarot, re: the deck's considered notability by independent authorities on the Tarot.

http://www.tarotpedia.com/wiki/Mythic_Tarot

Also note that there is a Wikipedia entry for Liz Greene, one of the creators of the Mythic Tarot. Does that indicate some notability precedent for her works?

Pardon any redundancy. As I'm new to this process, I've copied this info to a couple of Talk pages on this subject. Hope this is helpful. Thanks for your attention to this issue. --Atalanta the Huntress (talk) 09:06, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - oh how I wish I could vote keep, this is such an interesting topic. The sources given appear to be primary and every other source contradicts itself. Are they from Greek history or Hindu in origin? Who created them? Who uses them? Why are these used? - I found no consistent narrative whatsoever. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 19:19, 14 September 2012 (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.