Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daylighter

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. DGG ( talk ) 04:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daylighter

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

Delete. Unsourced WP:DICDEF of a neologism, attested only in social networking and/or user-generated sources and not in any conventional reliable source literary or film criticism. While it's true that some recent writers of vampire literature have been trying to change things up from the traditional conventions by writing vampires who don't have to avoid sunlight, it's not Wikipedia's job to help propagate user-created neologisms for that -- our role here is to wait until critics analyze this as a thing, and cite their work on it to support an article. (By comparison, zombie fiction has also been evolving from traditional zombies toward fast-running musclehulk zombies and/or zombies who retain normal human cognitive function. But we don't have standalone articles about neologistic new terms for those new types of zombies -- we just discuss that evolution in the main article on zombie itself.) Bearcat (talk) 19:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - must be made up because I don't find any independent sources.Glendoremus (talk) 04:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:SYNTHy. Bondegezou (talk) 11:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above reasons. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with nom/Bearcat.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 19:41, 4 March 2017 (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.