Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allodoxaphobia (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. Courcelles 00:01, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Allodoxaphobia
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a poorly sourced non-notable phobia; the potential list of phobias is infinite. Not every phobia is sufficiently notable to warrant an article of its own. FiachraByrne (talk) 10:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I would say keep. There are scholarly and book sources to support that the word is real (although not widely used), and I don't see any harm in having an article about it as long as the article is verifiable. Looie496 (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. OK, but what specific sources do you mean and do they discuss the subject in sufficient detail to support an article?FiachraByrne (talk) 11:47, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't see any evidence that this has ever been documented in a subject, suggesting that it's just something that got made up and put into lists of phobias and a couple of insiprational books. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 05:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: In most sources, the term appears only as an item in a list of miscellaneous phobias. No evidence that the term is notable or that it is widely used. Sporadic use on blogs and in low-quality sources does not establish sufficient notability. It looks like it's a word that was coined simply for the purpose of coining a word. WP:TRIVIA applies. Search of Google scholar indicates that it is highly unlikely that notability requirements will ever be meet. Delete in its entirety. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 12:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence this a recognised condition. A few writers thinking "Oh someone's afraid of speaking publicly so they must be afraid of what people think about them - they must be afraid of opinions....in my guide to all possible prefixes to the word -phobia that's called allodoxaphobia, so I'm going to use that word in my book for motivational speakers" does not constitute anything other than the misuse of a neologism.--Pontificalibus (talk) 12:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.