Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climacophilia


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 00:48, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Climacophilia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an alleged paraphilia that does not appear to exist. It has only been mentioned in a handful of "super strange fetishes" lists and in one "super strange fetishes" book, not a single hit on PubMed.

Source 2:

Source 1 is a blog post by behavioural psychologist Mark D. Griffiths which goes into detail about the sourcing that exists about this paraphilia, he even discusses this very article:.

He concludes:

– Thjarkur (talk) 00:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)


 * BJAODN per nom. While I'm not the biggest fan of using WordPress as evidence of this being a hoax, nor do I think it's completely one, it doesn't appear to meet our notability guidelines. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:51, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete/BJAODN Non-notable and...I have no words I guess except if you still find arousal after tumbling down a flight of stairs...congratulations, I guess?  Nate  • ( chatter ) 02:14, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The earliest source that I can find, which devotes six words to this, is contemporary with the 2006-02-15 Urban Dictionary entry that this article was originally sourced to.  That was around the time that Wikipedia editors were challenging a multiplicity of articles on supposed -philias and -phobias some of which stuck around for years (c.f., , , , , , , ,  and many others).  This appears to be something made up around 2006.  We have for a decade and a half set a higher bar than sourced-to-Urban-Dictionary, even indirectly.  Uncle G (talk) 02:22, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, pollution, nothing more. Hyperbolick (talk) 03:05, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Throw down the stairs (or maybe don't, because it likes that), per all above. To add on to 's comment, there are almost certainly more of these. I recently successfully PRODded katoptronophilia and thalpotentiginy. There are a bunch more similarly dubious -philias scattered around on this template. -Crossroads- (talk) 03:47, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - it appears to be neither a joke nor notable. What ore can I add? Bearian (talk) 02:17, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete As above, I, too, can only find single line mentions of this term as some 'rare, unheard of' fetish. I can find nothing substantial in Google books that suggests it has been covered in any detailed manner that would meet our notability criteria. At best, this would merit a cited mention in List of paraphilias as that list seems partly based upon Appendix 1 of a 2008 book, mentioned there. But I also note the concerns above, by, of post 2006 Urban dictionary terms sneaking in as something notable. As that book and the List article says: Like allergies, sexual arousal may occur from anything under the sun, including the sun.". Anyway, I tried it - and it doesn't work, so, that said, I'm going back to my bathtub! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete As above, I, too, can only find single line mentions of this term as some 'rare, unheard of' fetish. I can find nothing substantial in Google books that suggests it has been covered in any detailed manner that would meet our notability criteria. At best, this would merit a cited mention in List of paraphilias as that list seems partly based upon Appendix 1 of a 2008 book, mentioned there. But I also note the concerns above, by, of post 2006 Urban dictionary terms sneaking in as something notable. As that book and the List article says: Like allergies, sexual arousal may occur from anything under the sun, including the sun.". Anyway, I tried it - and it doesn't work, so, that said, I'm going back to my bathtub! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2019 (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.