Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Consummate love

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. 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 merge and redirect to Triangular theory of love. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 22:30, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Consummate love
Not an encyclopedia article, not a wiktionary article. RickK 07:46, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can't decide if it's original research or merely a dicdef. --Carnildo 07:48, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Wiktionary, i think it has potential as a dicdef. Foobaz &middot; &#10000;  08:00, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I didn't realize there was so much other related information in Wikipedia already, like Kappa says below. Foobaz &middot; &#10000;  22:52, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm down with a merge and redirect too. Foobaz &middot; &#10000;  02:08, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * REWRITTEN. It's a concept from the triangular theory of love, so I replaced the original "off the top of the head" sounding definition with something more researched. Keep this or merge it with triangular theory of love. Kappa 10:53, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, cleanup and expand. Megan1967 22:34, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but needs expansion. Tygar 06:39, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Triangular theory of love as it stands all the articles arising from that page are stubby definitions only applicable to that theory--nixie 04:08, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, add stub template. &asymp; jossi &asymp; 04:09, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep with rewrites from Kappa. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 04:44, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment, I don't really see the need for three articles explaning the various aspects of one man's simple theory. In fact it probably makes a better article to have them all on one page.--nixie 06:44, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Feel free to merge them yourself Kappa 08:25, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Psychology jargon/term of art.  The triangular theory of love isn't so notable that we need multiple articles to cover its special terminology.  "Triangular theory of love"+"Robert Sternberg" has only 364 Google hits. "Consummate love"+"triangular" gets 406 hits.    If this article were longer, I'd say redirect it in order to maintain the history, but since it is two sentences, it should just be deleted, and someone can expand Triangular theory of love.  Anyway, aspects of the theory are handled better in context, rather than having to click around all over the place to piece it together from multiple stubby little articles.  Why the insistence on breaking so many topics into multiple stubby articles? There isn't a prize for racking up the article count, is there?  --BM 22:36, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * If we do it your way, no-one will expand triangular theory of love, they will just put another stub at consummate love, and it will be deleted again. Kappa 06:31, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I've merged this and the other off-shoot to triangular theory of love- there in no reason not to make this redirect there now--nixie 01:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to triangular theory of love. The exact same text (sans links) is already there, so no merging necessary.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 04:37, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * LOL "no merging necessary". Kappa 05:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, I didn't see nixie's comment. Gimme a break. At any rate, since the text has been merged, deletion is no longer an option.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 20:34, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. -Sean Curtin 03:09, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

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