Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philandry


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 23:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Philandry

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The term 'philandry' does not appear in any dictionary save Wiktionary, where no verification or provenance is supplied. The dictionary refs given in the article are bogus. Deletion is requested because the subject lacks reliable supporting sources. Bjenks (talk) 08:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Although not in dictionaries, a Google Books search indicates that it seems to exist in some books. However, not enough to justify an article. Merge to the article most appropriately covering sexuality and gender terms. bd2412  T 22:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  21:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Its capacity for confusion with similar terms makes this an extremely unhelpful word. The closest dictionary entries in the OED are 1. philander, n.2 1737 ...(Usu. in form filander.) The dusky wallaby or pademelon;   2. philander, v. 1778 ...intr. Esp. of a man: to flirt; to engage in casual sexual or romantic encounters;   3. philanderer, n. 1841...A man who philanders; a male flirt....   Coining of this word would bring about about an unnecessary clash of meaning between philandrer or philandrist (= a person who loves men) and philanderer (= most usually, a man who loves women). I can imagine such mischief being promoted only by users having a poor knowledge of English, or whose intention is deliberately to confuse and obfuscate. Bjenks (talk) 04:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Dictionary definition that says nothing encyclopedic about its subject, whether or not it is even a real word. JulesH (talk) 20:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just a (questionable) dictionary entry. Not appropriate for Wikipedia. Kaldari (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. Although I have proposed a (nonspecific) merge, I have no particularly strong objection to deleting, either. bd2412  T 22:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge Just dump Philandry in Misandry, and Philogyny in Misogyny. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2014 (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.