Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phasmophobia

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 Speedy keep. Procedural keep. Article is linked from the main page. Please seek its removal from the main page first, then resubmit . Synergy 19:06, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phasmophobia

While there is such thing as "fear of ghosts", the word "phasmophobia" is nothing but a word coinage: there are no valid references to the disease (specific phobia) with such name. The article is an original research produced by arbitrarily combining descriptions from books dealing with superstitions and texts which describe generic specific phobias. Once again, the article does not produce references for actual clinical cases of "phasmophobia". Mukadderat (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If someone is going to "improve" the article by adding references to various psychology webistes which promise you to heal from phasmophobia for three easy payments of $995, please read the article -phobia, about various phobia lists. Mukadderat (talk) 22:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Arguably more notable than others on the list. Quite a few hits on Google Books. Although I suspect there will be future problems with WP:RS and WP:FRINGE. - Atmoz (talk) 23:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All these googole book hist are dicdefs with zero content beyond it. `'Míkka >t 00:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Atmoz. Also, things like this and this could be added as WP:RS's even though they mention "fear of ghosts" rather than the technical term. Its presence on medical sites (e.g., [1] and [2]) is also promising. Cosmic Latte (talk) 00:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: By the way, if "phasmophobia" seems too obscure a word, then the article could simply be renamed to "Fear of ghosts." I see no reason to delete the material. Cosmic Latte (talk) 00:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All reputable info about "Fear of ghosts" may be merged into "ghost article, where it is already discussed on a broader level. `'Míkka >t 00:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research: all text which is specifically about the clinical case is nothing but auhor's paraphrasing of standard texts about specific phobias with no referenceds to actual texts about "phasmophobia" besides dicdefs. Google presents no evidence of notability of the actual disease with this name. "wrongdiagnosis" and other websites are content spammers and cannot be reliable sources, since there is no reliable source for their texts are presented. `'Míkka>t 00:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Refute: Google does not determine notability, nor are their any 'content spamming' websites referenced in the article. Additionally, "Exploring Psychology" (referenced in the article) does specifically mention how hypnosis contributes to phenomena like the fear of ghosts. αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 00:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- To mikkalai: Which would be why you deleted the article three times against policy and process because in your point-of-view specific phobia are "garbage"? ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 02:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Atmoz and Cosmic Latte, αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 00:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Transwiki to wiktionary. No evidence it is a real disease, just a word. People fear of many weird things: cemeteries, pumpkinheads, Jack the Ripper, black cats, etc. These are superstitions, not diseases. Timurite (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Refute: You are correct, there is no evidence that phasmophobia is a real disease - mainly because it's not - phasmophobia is an anxiety disorder. And there is clear evidence that phasmophobia is not a superstition (see article references). αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 00:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Anxiety disorder is a psychiatric disease. `'Míkka>t 20:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Because it lacks a known organic cause, it is more appropriately referred to as a "disorder" than a "disease." There is a reason why mental disease and even mental illness redirect to mental disorder. Cosmic Latte (talk) 14:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per cosmic latte. A fear of ghosts in notable, despite most sources not using the technical term. This AFD is the result of the POV of a specific few editors who believe that all specific phobia are "garabage" and one has even abused their administrator powers to push that view. ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 02:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep well written, sourced, clearly notable. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- well written original research, the cited sources do not describe phasmophobia beyond dicdef. `'Míkka>t 20:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - And you know this because you have each cited source and checked? Anything I wrote in the article is cited from books I found in my local library. ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 00:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - It sounds like Ameliorate! has taken time to do detailed research on the phobia. Has anyone else researched library books yet? Until you too go to the library to research the phobia, you are not qualified to refute Ameliorate on the article's notability. αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 01:28, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I challenge you to cite the books from your library which describe specifically phasmophobia disorder, not fear of ghosts or phobias in general. `'Míkka >t 17:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, original research. It might be possible to write a good article on the topic, but this ain't it. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:53, 31 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Would you mind indicating what in the article is original research? ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 13:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well sourced, notable, and the deletes smell of WP:IDONTLIKEIT.--Gen. Bedford ^{his Forest} 15:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep changed my mind its good, I looked through it again and it seems fine, I must of misread it the first time, hunger impairs judgement. --Zaharous (talk) 18:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Properly conducted entry, construction at high quality. Cross links with appropriate subject matter. Retain the article, for it is recommended to help the user community both directly with the entry, but also with its extensive cross-links to useful topics. Plus the categorization points of interest help the reader very well.--[[User:Agencius|Content is a plus and agnostic viewpoints stated are not a part of this, triskadekaphobia, fear for the number 13]] ^{or like phobias reality is perception of the individual based.} 16:42, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please notice that triskaidekaphobia is defined as an irrational fear and supersitiion, not as a specific phobia, and as such it is well referenced. Laudak (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete original synthesis to create a new original research article about a dubious specific phobia basing on texts about ghosts and phobias. Laudak (talk) 17:45, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, wrong. The sources are related to a fear of ghosts, or phasmophobia ie. they specifically mention and discuss it directly. ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 18:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into a "fear of ghosts" section in ghosts, and trim down to the ghost-phobia-specific material (i.e. without giving a "ghost" paraphrase to a bunch of generic sources on specific phobias). --Delirium (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You realise that all the sources SPECIFICALLY mention the term "Phasmophobia" or "fear of ghosts"? Right? Among others of course, but it is in there. ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 18:06, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the WP:SYNTH policy, then I will start explaining what is wrong with your article in detail, if you are interested. Laudak (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Atmoz. — neuro^(talk) 18:55, 31 October 2008 (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.