Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Awe (emotion)


 * 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The result was Nomination withdrawn. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Awe (emotion)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

A dictionary definition. Already exists at Wiktionary. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you to everyone for their input. The consensus is clearly that this is a legitimate encyclopedic topic and that there is an article waiting to be written here. Accordingly, I withdraw my nomination. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. Definitely has expansion potential for psychology, neurology, etc, per sources such as this and this that deal with awe as an emotion and not merely as a word.  Celarnor Talk to me  20:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Article is notable but requires sourcing. Luk  suh  21:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Could certainly be expanded, but it needs a lot of work. As it stands right now, it's not even a good stub article. --clpo13(talk) 21:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as dicdef. Granted, it could potentially be turned into an encyclopedic treatment of the subject, but this article, as it stands now, has no encyclopedic content. No prejudice against someone recreating it later as encyclopedic content or to anyone who would care to add such material now to make the article suitable for inclusion. OlenWhitaker   • talk to me or don't • ♣ ♥ ♠ ♦ 21:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Phil Bridger makes a good point below. After further review of WP:DICDEF I am changing my opinion to neutral.  OlenWhitaker   • talk to me or don't • ♣ ♥ ♠ ♦ 17:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. This article needs be expanded. Wrath is an example of good article about emotions. Zero Kitsune (talk) 23:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:DICDEF gives a very clear explanation of the difference between a dictionary definition and an enclopedic stub. This is clearly the latter. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Can be expanded. ChessCreator (talk) 16:50, 6 April 2008 (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.