Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anatidaephobia (2 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. Protected redirect created to List_of_phobias#Jocular_and_fictional_phobias. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 05:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anatidaephobia[edit]

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

A joke phobia from a comic strip. No evidence of notability. Xuz (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- I agree with the nominator. Also, can some friendly passing admin check to see if this article is substantially the same as the one that was deleted in 2005? It might be a candidate for speedying as a recreating of a previously deleted article. Reyk _YO! 03:58, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have checked the deletion log and the deleted versions. This article has been deleted ten times during the last five years. In the process, it has kept being rewritten and then deleted. Eight versions of the article have been simple mentions that Gary Larson came up with this idea, just like it is now. One was pure vandalism and one was a redirect to -phobia. Therefore I can say it does indeed meet the criterion you mention above. JIP | Talk 09:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete NN per above CTJF83 chat 04:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an salt. Deleted over 10 times now,absolutely no secondary sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:07, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As an administrator, I have the power to delete, protect and salt pages. I agree with User:TenPoundHammer's opinion that this article should be deleted if it can't have any other sources than being mentioned by Gary Larson. I am thinking of either deleting and salting the page or making a protected redirect to -phobia. Can I do so? Which one should I do? JIP | Talk 20:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother with a redirect. There's no way in Hell it would ever warrant a mention at the list of phobias — absolutely no secondary source has mentioned it, and there's no point in making a redirect if the subject is unlikely to be mentioned in the target. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and describe it as an imaginary phobia. People WILL look it up, and if it is correctly described as imaginary, then perhaps it will stop the constant deletions and additions. Patehler (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Salt. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:15, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please provide a little more detailed argument than just "salt"? JIP | Talk 23:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry that was a bit curt. I was referring to this article's repeated recreation, discussed above, which in my view justifies creation protection. There is, in my view, no mergeable content. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK, thanks for the explanation. I feel the same way too. The only thing preventing me from supporting your view is that because this has been mentioned in a very popular comic, people will come to Wikipedia to look it up, and if they can't find it, they will create an article about it, not knowing that it has been deleted ten times already. If this is the case, Wikipedia should acknowledge the existence of the fact that "anatidaephobia" has been mentioned in a comic in some way. That does not mean it should have an article of its own. JIP | Talk 23:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Cheers. On that basis, it may be a viable search term so I'd support a protected redirect. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2010 (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.