Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stygiophobia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was nomination withdrawn. I'm going to interpret the nominator's "keep" vote as a withdraw. Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
| Advanced search for: "fear of hell" | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
No indication this is an encyclopedic topic. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Prod removed without comment. SummerPhD (talk) 00:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.A perusal of Google Books failed to deliver anything that can be called discussion of the topic--it's treated as just a word. The most informative discussion I found was in this book, but on closer inspection (prompted by the incorrect semi-colon in the last sentence--the article author should appreciate that) it turns out that this is a self-published book of no standard at all. Drmies (talk) 03:07, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]- As I say below, try looking for the non-Greek name as given up there ⇗. You'll find Piero Camporesi's Pennsylvania State University Press book that has the subject as its title and that does apparently discuss the subject. Uncle G (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdrawn. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- As I say below, try looking for the non-Greek name as given up there ⇗. You'll find Piero Camporesi's Pennsylvania State University Press book that has the subject as its title and that does apparently discuss the subject. Uncle G (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Transwiki to Wiktionary? - The Bushranger One ping only 04:10, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Surely any phobia is a medical condition? There are plenty of pages on phobias on wikipedia. See list of phobias. Obviously the page is only a stub and is meant to be improved upon. Secondly, I'd like to say that SummerPHD only added this proposal for deletion as a malicious act because they are having a dispute with me. VenomousConcept (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you have any evidence of that? Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 12:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps VC should strike his comment, and we can simply discuss the merits of the article. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:52, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- My evidence is a long list of perfectly valid edits that they have reverted recently. However, I agree with Dennis, not really relevant to this discussion. VenomousConcept (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning toward- Keep This is the same as hadephobia (which should redirect here), which brings up more hits. I'm a little torn but leaning keep. Drmies is correct that the only refs found push the term into WP:DICDEF territory, yet an expanded article would be quite encyclopedic, touching on both religious indoctrination and mental illness. It could be that refs are hard to fine online, but exist in older media. It is a real phobia, and likely should be included just as we included any psychiatric disorder. The subject matter should be covered somewhere here anyway. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]- I'm wondering, though, did you have evidence of it actually being a medical condition when you typed this, before the alternate terms and the Colonel's book link? Because I didn't. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I knew about before I saw this article (Had a Catholic mother that was raised by nuns. Seriously. It was a lifestyle I had to unlearn.), the links previously listed Stygiophobia [1] and [2], provided weak info, but it was my prior experience that made me say a weakish keep at first. I understand the nom and confusion before G helped us out, it isn't a common thing to know about. As disorders go, I don't recommend it. Dennis Brown (talk) 02:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I dedicated this one to the Colonel and Uncle G, but perhaps your mother is more deserving. BTW, same here. I can't tell you how often I had to listen to how they couldn't wear pants unless they wore a skirt over them. Drmies (talk) 02:47, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I knew about before I saw this article (Had a Catholic mother that was raised by nuns. Seriously. It was a lifestyle I had to unlearn.), the links previously listed Stygiophobia [1] and [2], provided weak info, but it was my prior experience that made me say a weakish keep at first. I understand the nom and confusion before G helped us out, it isn't a common thing to know about. As disorders go, I don't recommend it. Dennis Brown (talk) 02:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm wondering, though, did you have evidence of it actually being a medical condition when you typed this, before the alternate terms and the Colonel's book link? Because I didn't. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment — For the record, JSTOR is not turning anything up for the term, as far as I can see. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 12:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Try looking for the non-Greek name, as given up there ⇗. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow, thanks Uncle G, that solidifies my keep and expand. I should have thought to simplify the term even more, as you did. I knew there had to be oodles of literature on the church using stygiophobia to instill compliance, etc. The question is, what would be the proper title? Fear of Hell, Hadephobia, or the current Stygiophobia, with the other two redirected to. Dennis Brown (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It wasn't that hard. I've been here before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyctohylophobia (2nd nomination). As I said there, Wikipedia writers do concentrate more upon writing up every word ending in -phobia and less upon giving us an encyclopaedia article on the actual encyclopaedia subjects. Yes, I'd go with fear of Hell as the commonly used name of the subject. It fairly clearly is, given that the sources use it and don't use this name at all. ☺ It's a shame that the article as currently written contains no actual encyclopaedia content relating to the fear itself. Uncle G (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, it lacks encyclopedic content at this time, but maybe the the name change will make finding content a little easier. Properly written, the topic is an article I would actually like to read. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It wasn't that hard. I've been here before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyctohylophobia (2nd nomination). As I said there, Wikipedia writers do concentrate more upon writing up every word ending in -phobia and less upon giving us an encyclopaedia article on the actual encyclopaedia subjects. Yes, I'd go with fear of Hell as the commonly used name of the subject. It fairly clearly is, given that the sources use it and don't use this name at all. ☺ It's a shame that the article as currently written contains no actual encyclopaedia content relating to the fear itself. Uncle G (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow, thanks Uncle G, that solidifies my keep and expand. I should have thought to simplify the term even more, as you did. I knew there had to be oodles of literature on the church using stygiophobia to instill compliance, etc. The question is, what would be the proper title? Fear of Hell, Hadephobia, or the current Stygiophobia, with the other two redirected to. Dennis Brown (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Try looking for the non-Greek name, as given up there ⇗. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no objection to the article being moved to Wiktionary, or to all three terms linking to the same page. If you look at list of phobias there's really no difference between my article and most of the other articles on that page. Sometimes there isn't much more to say about a subject than it's definition. VenomousConcept (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The nomination makes no proper case for deletion because the point of our dicdef policy is structural - that we organise our topics by meaning rather than by spelling. See The Encyclopedia of Phobias, Fears, and Anxieties for a sensible encyclopaedic treatment. That entry starts "Fear of hell is known as hadephobia, stigiophobia, and stygiophobia.". The point of WP:DICDEF is that we should cover these words and phrases together because they have a common meaning. Deletion does not arise in this because we want to keep all the various words and phrases as redirects. Warden (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I see nothing to indicate that dicdef is merely organizational or structural. "Sometimes an article really is a mis-placed stub dictionary entry, that discusses the etymology, translations, usage, inflections, multiple distinct meanings, synonyms, antonyms, homophones, spelling, pronunciation, and so forth of a word or an idiomatic phrase" perfectly describes the page as nominated. How do we handle that? "If the article cannot be renamed, merged, or rewritten into a stub encyclopedia article about a subject, denoted by its title, then it should be deleted." - SummerPhD (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. In this case, there's a bit more that can be pulled out of the few sources that were brought up, though. Drmies (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Assuming that material shows up, it would certainly be reasonable to flesh out the article and (from the sounds of it) move it to the more general title. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. In this case, there's a bit more that can be pulled out of the few sources that were brought up, though. Drmies (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I see nothing to indicate that dicdef is merely organizational or structural. "Sometimes an article really is a mis-placed stub dictionary entry, that discusses the etymology, translations, usage, inflections, multiple distinct meanings, synonyms, antonyms, homophones, spelling, pronunciation, and so forth of a word or an idiomatic phrase" perfectly describes the page as nominated. How do we handle that? "If the article cannot be renamed, merged, or rewritten into a stub encyclopedia article about a subject, denoted by its title, then it should be deleted." - SummerPhD (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I've added a couple of sources and a tiny bit of material, enough (IMO) for a keep, though the article obviously needs a lot of work. Anyone who want to close this -- admin or otherwise -- can go ahead. As for a rename, my guess is "fear of Hell" makes the most sense, but I'll leave that to less involved parties. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I think 'fear of hell' should link to the page, but the scientific name stygiophobia or hadephobia should remain as the title, as is the case with most other pages on phobias, except common phobias where the phobia is more commonly known by another name e.g. the page on 'fear of the dark'.VenomousConcept (talk) 21:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe someone with a British keyboard can help me? I want to change the link to phobos from phobos (mythology) to phobos (mythology)/phobos, so that only the word phobos appears, but I don't know how to do that straight line. I can see it on the keyboard, before number 1 and below Esc, but there are 3 symbols on it, and I don't know how to produce the straight line. Argh! VenomousConcept (talk) 00:06, 21 March 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.