Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fairyology


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:33, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Fairyology

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Weakly-sourced WP:DICDEF - the claimed "earliest use found in Ainsworth's Magazine" is just an opera review that describes a song as a "piece of metrical fairyology". Modern news sources only seem to use the term with flippancy, giving the term no greater weight than "ghostologist" or "pumpkinologist" or anything. McGeddon (talk) 13:04, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete First, yes, this is WP:DICDEF because the existing content of the article is focused on stating in several different ways that the word means what it means, without then providing information about the thing it means, which is what an encyclopedia article does. I agree with McGeddon that there is no evidence that this is even an established word in any serious sense, or that what it connotes is an established field. A Google search for returns 100 hits and it isn't clear to me that as an organized topic it meets WP:GNG. I could be shown to be wrong about that, but that's my impression.In any event, unless someone wants to create an article from scratch, the current one would need to be edited down to the stub "Fairyology is the study of fairies", which is rather tautological even for a stub, which leads to McGeddon's remarks on "ghostology" or "pumpkinology". —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as utter bollocks. Fairies don't exist, and neither does this "field of study". Otherwise, someone would have won James Randi's Million Dollar Challenge by now. I had previously proposed deletion of the article, but the article creator removed it. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I would prefer to say that fairies have not been yet proven to exist - and not proven NOT to exist either... Anyway, they're as provable or otherwise as most (if not all) of the gods, demons and other whathaveyou across the globe. Not to mention horoscopes and homeopathic 'medicine', which are both bollocks but also notable. I've been researching the realms of faerie for a few years (for a book series), but have never heard this term in serious use. There is actually a brief entry on Wiktionary on it, which could do with a source adding, if anyone feels energetic. As to belief in fairies, I remember talking to some tinker children who would say 'I done it' (but not if being accused...), 'he done it' (more common), and 'her done it'. They wouldn't say 'she'. Why? They were from Ireland, and the word 'sidh' is pronounced the same as 'she'. And you don't talk about them, or even mention them, not if you can possibly avoid it. Peridon (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2015 (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.