Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyctohylophobia


 * 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   keep. As the topic has been proven notable and encyclopedic, deletion is not required; rather, the article needs expansion in order to pass inclusion criteria. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:18, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Nyctohylophobia

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Deprodded; page should be moved to Wiktionary. Bwrs (talk) 09:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  —JohnCD (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It is true that the present article presents little more than a dicdef, but any disease, medical condition, etc has potential for expansion beyond a dic-def. It's an acceptable stub which should be kept, allowing it to grow, and there is no WP:DEADLINE for improvement (and the article is only been around for 4 days). Power.corrupts (talk) 10:46, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a dic-def, an article about a word, and a made-up word at that; it could never be an encyclopedic article about the thing the word denotes because that thing does not exist. The source cited is an "anxietyinsights.info" website which has great lists of these, including:
 * Theologicophobia: An abnormal, persistent fear of theology
 * Santaphobia: An abnormal, persistent fear of Father Christmas
 * Hydrargyophobia - An abnormal, persistent fear of mercury based medicines
 * Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia - An abnormal, persistent fear of long words
 * Anybody can have fun sticking Greek words together and making these up and compiling lists of them (I remember one of Willie Garvin's tall stories involved a girl with arachibutyrophobia, a morbid fear of peanut butter sticking to the roof of the mouth - and now I check, there it is on anxietyinsights.info); but they are not real words and do not correspond to anything real - I doubt if anyone has ever been diagnosed with any of them, or if any psychiatrist ever uses them. I would need to see evidence to the contrary before I considered this for an article. I doubt if Wiktionary would be interested in artificial words like this, either. JohnCD (talk) 11:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's in Oxford handbook of psychiatry‎ - Page 353 - but I admit that the terms does not seem to be in widespread usage, but it is not WP:MADEUP Power.corrupts (talk) 11:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that too is just a list entry - it doesn't saying anything about it that could expand it beyond a dic-def. I don't suggest it's made up in the WP:NFT sense, but in the sense that it's a constructed word rather than one used to describe something real. JohnCD (talk) 11:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Since I started all this by creating the page in the first place, I have to say it probably does exist, but no-one seems to know very much about it, so a dic-def on Wikitionary would probably be more appropriate. At least it would then be covered by some research source. --06SmithG (talk) 16:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Transwiki to Wikitionary. While not something made up in class one day, there's still nothing here that justifies an encyclopedic entry here for this "condition".  Transwiki it over, and if anyone ever wnats to build a real, informative article that goes beyond the definition, that'd be fine.  Bradjamesbrown (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - A psychological condition that can be backed up with many, many sources including;, , , , , , , , . It might seem like a dictionary definition but it is still a medical condition, something that makes up the cornerstone of any good encyclopedia. - Marcusmax  ( speak ) 21:02, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per PowerCorrupts' and Marcusmax's reasonings. De728631 (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment from nominator: there are many simple phobias.  All of them can be mentioned in the article on specific phobias and/or the list of phobias, as well as being defined in Wiktionary.  On the other hand, many of these simple phobias have their own article, so that would be an argument in favor of keeping, albeit a weak one.  Bwrs (talk) 00:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My point is basically that if deleted, there will not be any expansion; if kept, expansion the normal Wikipedia way is at least possible. For some concepts and -isms a stub can look deceptively like a dic-def, until improvement has actually taken place.  Sometimes I also try to step back from the nitty-gritty detail of all these guidelines (disliking WP:CREEP) and ask myself if a deletion will actually improve the encyclopdia, beyond the satisfaction and peace of mind in knowing that policies and guidelines are duly enforced.  There is a difference (though subtle) between arguing WP:NOHARM of keeping, and WP:NOBENEFIT of deleting.  Power.corrupts (talk) 09:18, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Marcusmax has shown there are several reliable sources available. Edward321 (talk) 14:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Power.corrupts. Needs to be expanded. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Transwiki In order to not be a WP:DICDEF, the article needs to demonstrate that the specific phobia is notable per se -- that it has been discussed in a specific scientific/cultural context, that it has properties beyond those of a simple phobia, etc. The many creative -phobia words for kinds of fear are tempting sources of lexical richness for the authors of the works cited above and in the article, but unless a particular phobia goes beyond the minimum threshold of a rhetorical flourish, it should remain a list entry here and be made a Wiktionary entry. (For an example of a phobia article that meets and exceeds this bar, see agoraphobia.)  —  æk Talk  11:47, 3 December 2009 (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.