Deletion of Hell in entertainment and other popular culture

Comment: Because, if done properly, it would be once of the largest X in Popular Culture lists in existance. Because of that, it would be an |indiscriminate list of #DIR|loosely connected items. Hell is such a common plot element that there should probably be an article on that by itself, but not a list about times it's used
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:IINFO||WP:NOT)

Comment: per #DIR #1. I know that ''indiscriminate'' has become a nasty word in certain quarters, but this list and similar ones are truly indiscriminate by design, in that there is nothing in the context provided that would allow one to retain notable and relevant entries while rejecting nonnotable and irrelevant ones—all that's required is that the reference be to "something in popular culture" and that hell be alluded to, however obscurely. In this article, moreover, the unsourceable subjectivity begins in the first entry ("the most imaginative and famous depiction of hell") and recurs throughout. Everyone's always saying that these topics can be turned into acceptable articles; but I've seldom seen that happen, and I see no reason for unacceptable ones to be preserved while we wait. If there's an encyclopedic topic here, let someone create an article on it afresh
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: unsourced list of people's favorite Hell trivia. Pretty much a poster child for |unverifiability and |original resource. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of folklore
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:OR)