Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psycho-biddy (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 redirect to Gender in horror films. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 16:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Psycho-biddy[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The term is a neo-logism (see talk page for full story). Google hits seem to all be echoes of this article. Current article has three citations, of which one is a MAD magazine parody, one is a one paragraph film review that uses the term in an off-hand way, and a modest write up that may have used the WP as part of its genesis. There is an associated category (Category:Psycho-biddy films) that exists to re-list the same films mentioned here. As it stands, the article does not add much of anything. Matt Deres (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Matt Deres (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NEOLOGISM none of the sources support this being a recognised term Dexxtrall (talk)
~~Keep~~. I was able to find several sources that discuss the topic, a few of which are put out by major academic publishers. While it's not as heavily discussed as some of the other subgenres of horror, it's still discussed enough to where I'd say that it's more than just a neologism per se. I'm open to merging this somewhere if there's a good target article. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:07, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My preference would also be to find it a home as part of something else. Matt Deres (talk) 13:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Quick notes: my main concerns with merging is that there's not really a great target article. Also, the article's main concern is basically this: that the term more or less originated with the article. In other words, the term wasn't in wide use or recognized prior to the article's creation in 2005.

In response to the latter issue, I'm reading over the Peter Shelley book (ended up buying a Kindle copy since I figured I'd enjoy it anyway) and he mentions that Charles Busch's play Die, Mommie, Die!, was written as a tribute to the subgenre. The play was performed in 1999 and the film adaptation was put out in 2003, so this predates the article FWIW. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's also apparently a mention in the 1972 book "Hollywood in the Sixties" by John Baxter. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are a couple of merge possibilities; I was unaware of our article at Archaic mother until today, but it actually mentions "the role of the archaic mother as monstrous figure in the horror film". That article is not in great shape either, but a more generic article would be easier to build up sources for. Gender in horror films would be another possibility, but it has a different focus. Matt Deres (talk) 18:38, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It might not be a bad idea to create an article on the "Archaic mother in fiction" and create a section for the psycho-biddy genre. The character is kind of a staple. As far as genres go, the genre seems to have existed without an official title (and the plethora of names shows that there's some mild disagreement on what to call the genre), but the terms are in far more use now than they once were. I don't really think it's a neologism per se, given that it's been in use for a relatively long time and in a wide variety of outlets, FWIW. But an archaic mother in fiction article could serve as a good landing page for this subgenre.

Hmm... although all of that said... I think that there's definitely a good argument to be made for creating an article on the depictions of older women in film. Sourcing in general definitely exists. What say you? I'm still working on improving the psycho-biddy article in the hopes of saving it, but regardless of how this AfD ends I think that an article is warranted on the depiction of older women in film. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:30, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think something is warranted. One of the things I found odd about the article as I found it was how narrow it was. Like, why specifically exclude stuff like Sunset Boulevard and Misery based on release date? Once you open up the field a bit, as you suggest, there are many more examples (and, hopefully, many more sources). But I think part of the exercise should be a rename; the gestation of the current article title is laid out in the talk page and it's embarrassingly self-referential. Matt Deres (talk) 21:02, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To prevent this from becoming too long, I'm going to switch this to the talk page of this AfD. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:53, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Run n Fly (talk) 14:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect. I'm changing my argument after going through one of the book sources used in the article. It really only covers a short amount of films and is a little vague about things. I can also see where the term is more or less recently created. This should absolutely be covered somewhere, but I think an article on its own is premature at this point in time. The article on the portrayal of gender in horror is a good landing page for now, but I'm also working on an article on the portrayal of aging in horror, which would be a smidge better of a landing page once it's created. My new job doesn't really allow for a lot of editing and my computer is broken so I'm limited in when I can work on it, but I hope to have that article up relatively soon. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Where do people want to merge this?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:58, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying my argument to specify that for now, I think it should redirect to gender in horror films. I'm working on a page on aging in horror, but I'm hitting a bit of a barrier when it comes to accessing sourcing. The sourcing is there, but so much of it is paywalled that I have to wait for access. Thankfully some of the bigger sources I want to access I can gain through the various WP projects (like WP:McFarland) but I have to wait to be approved. If anyone wants to help with this, please feel free to do so! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:50, 7 June 2021 (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.