Deletion of Cthulhu Mythos in popular culture (2nd nomination)

Comment: WP:OR|original research by |synthesis. Sources are individual TV episodes and text. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be the only place where original research is published. It's supposed to be a tertiary source, covering accepted knowledge in other areas. Also fails the |general notability guideline because there are no sources to  of this list. There might be sources for a smaller overview in the main article but not as a pretext for a list of every possible appearance. Wikipedia is |not a directory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN||WP:GNG||WP:NOTDIR||WP:verify notability)

Comment: Clearly notable topic, article content issues are article content issues and not relevant here.  "SOURCED information is now at main page (Cthulhu)" is a specifically dysfunctional part of the nomination because Cthulhu and this article have different scopes; Cthulhu is about the ''specific character'' Cthulhu, with general Cthulhu Mythos material (for example, concerning Yog-Sothoth or the Deep Ones) excluded, which the nominator does not seem to have understood.  Again, Cthulhu ''is not the "main page"'' for this topic; Cthulhu Mythos, the place that this list is a  from in the first place, is
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SPINOUT)

Comment: The topic is notable - see ''http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3jTFK9HTZaUC&pg=PA25 H.P. Lovecraft in popular culture'', for example.  The rest is a matter of ordinary editing per our |editing policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT)

Comment: No reliable secondary sources cover this topic to presume that it meets the |general notability guideline and the content of the article relies on |original research by synthesis, taking information from different media and creating information that does not exist outside of the article. In my opinion this topic falls into WP:!|what Wikipedia is not because it is |an indiscriminate collection of information and |a directory. Tertiary sources are not objective evidence of notability, particularly when they are not independent of the subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SYN||WP:IINFO||WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: per guidelines at . This article is essentially a raw list of mentions of concepts from the Cthulhu mythos (see ). Most mentions are are also trivial and unsourced. We should only be mentioning references that are |notable. Remaining mentions could be easily merged back into the parent article. See also the essay 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA||WP:INDISCRIMINATE||WP:N||WP:POPCULTURE)