Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mask fetishism (2nd nomination)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mask fetishism

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

Practically non-notable. Cites no sources. Googling it reveals few reliable, with many un-reliable sources (fetish blogs, wikia, etc) and Wikipedia mirrors.

I am aware of the ten-year-old previous discussion. Mr. Spink ^{^{talk★contribs}} 21:50, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:10, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veil fetishism, an article that shared the same issues. We adopt a notability threshold to avoid having articles on everything that exists. This article is utterly unreferenced and there is nothing to suggest that it meets WP:GNG. WJBscribe (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I'm seeing only brief mentions, unless someone can show otherwise haven't found significant amount of discussion among secondary or scholarly sources. — Cirt (talk) 17:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom, no real notability. QueenCake (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2016 (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.