Deletion of Krakatoa in media and popular culture

Comment: more or less per nom. This is dismal stuff, almost entirely unsourced speculation. I could probably go in there and suggest, because maybe I think it's true, that Hershey's Krackel bar is a Krakatoa reference because, you know, it has that "Krak" thing at the beginning, right guys? This is plainly  material, at least as I understand it. Maybe  as well. I like how the lede almost cedes this point, saying "many examples are based in the culture of expression and have no connection in any way with the explosion at all." I will say that much of this is rather amusing/interesting content
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: or '''merge''' to Krakatoa.  I just trimmed some trivial mentions (of the nature of "In work X, character Y says "this reminds me of Krakatoa!") and apparently non-notable examples, but some substantive cultural depictions remain.  Deletion simply is not an option per  because even if further trimmed down (by normal editing) to a mere few works, this information at a minimum belongs in the parent article.  Whether there is enough for a standalone split-off article is a matter for normal editing and discussion to resolve.  If there are enough notable works, then it also functions as an index of notable works by shared subject in addition to being a subtopic of Krakatoa.  The claims that this is  are difficult to understand, because this does not combine material from different sources to make a conclusion or statement of fact that those sources do not support.  And for the claim that this is garden-variety , it seems that this claim was made on the incorrect belief that mere reliance on a primary source constitutes OR.  Whether a work is about, or substantively depicts Krakatoa is verifiable, even if from the work itself.  Listing such works together does not inherently constitute SYNTH even if you are the first to do so, no more than it is to be the first to combine information from two particular biographies about a "George Washington" without having a third book telling you that the biographies are indeed about the same man
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:SYNTH||WP:OR)

Comment: The topic is notable - see http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JADiKdzkJqsC&pg=PA296 here, for example.  The rest is a matter of ordinary editing in accordance with our |editing policy.  AFD is not cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT)