Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aibohphobia

Aibohphobia was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was transwiki to Wiktionary. As of 17:41, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC), this article is still in the queue to be moved. Rossami (talk)

This seems to be a modification of a listing in BJAODN. There's some discussion on the talk page about the notability of this article, but it doesn't look like it's ever gone through VFD since being created in 2002. At any rate, an article about a non-notable joke at best, and a joke itself at worst. - RedWordSmith 18:03, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * The Aibohphobia article was created on 6th November 2002. The BJAODN entry was added on 18th December 2002.  - Mike Rosoft 10:31, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * It gets multiple hits in google so I'm inclined to believe that it's a real word though it may be a neologism. Content is a mere definition and theory of origin. Transwiki to Wiktionary.  Rossami 23:03, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In the article's talk page it has been agreed that it can be kept as long as it is made obvious that it is a joke. Anyway, I believe this article can be kept. -- Mike Rosoft 23:42, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep it. It mentions its (dubious) roots in comic-strip. How do you think phobias get invented people? It also mentions robotic dogs (which are evil and should be anhilated at any given opportunity).--ZZ 07:36, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep it. Mentions its humouristic nature, and seems to have indeed existed before the Wikipedia article (so not a BJAODN). Rama 16:46, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable.  Hits are wikipedia mirrors and mailing list archives.  A modest success as a transitory joke.  -- WOT 20:49, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I have seen this term several times outside of the webspace(in non-humour, and pseudo-humour, almost never in full-on humour settings). Wikipedia should not merely be relegated to what gets hits on google (it should make hits on google).--ZayZayEM 01:42, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Another lost VfD. Weak keep. Cool Hand Luke  04:48, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Interesting enough, but the standard practice for dealing with phobias ius to redirect them to -phobia, so I say merge and redirect -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 08:25, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. [[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 16:35, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: It was on VfD, and I believe it got a majority but not conclusive delete vote.  The majority feeling, as I recall it, was that it was a joke that had grown famous and that such was not sufficient to make it encyclopedia worthy.  I did not vote at that time, I believe.  However, due to process, I will this time, although it looks like it will be kept. Geogre 18:21, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It has been continuously on VfD since 27th August; it received the first vote (Wiktionary) on 2nd September; second vote (mine, keep) on 21st September; next one on 10th October. It is just a forgotten VfD discussion. - Mike Rosoft 10:34, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Recreation of previously deleted content...that swhould make it a speedy, right?   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 23:02, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, this article was never deleted. - Mike Rosoft 10:31, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * You'll find it on the Bad Jokes and other deleted nonsense page. delete--Thewayforward 11:49, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.