Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pogonophobia


 * 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. Article has been improved a lot after the deletion nomination (specially the history section). More importantly, there is not any "delete" vote, and consensus seems to be in favour of keeping the article. (non-admin closure) Tito ☸ Dutta 23:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Pogonophobia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Incoherent article describing a few incidents where people talked of pogonophobia, instead of defining it with proper sources. As it stands, it's mostly a dictionary definition, which would fit better on Wiktionary. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * So, could be improved then, instead of deleted. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Why only perhaps? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep My thoughts exactly, there's enough material out there for a proper article, with information from some moresources yet be incorporated. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 22:21, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not allowed (by Google) to read the book, but common-phobias.com doesn't seem like a WP:RS to me. The other website, maybe. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * We'll let you, even if Google won't. But what's it doing at "common-phobias.com"? My giddy aunt, it's got to be rarer than hen's teeth, surely? Well, until Paxman+BBC+Twitter came along of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry yes, that was an error, I had lots of windows open at once and picked the wrong link. I meant this one for some background. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 22:39, 15 August 2013 (UTC) But that is a rather good point you raise there, Martin!
 * Keep Unless a new article is deemed a suitable candidate for speedy deletion, is it not best practice to give it a bit of time to be developed first, rather than jumping on it straight after its birth? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Cloudy. Bet you're glad you returned! As they famously say down our way: "You can't comb a hairy ball flat without creating a cowlick" -- Hillbillyholiday talk 01:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - unlike some previous phobia AfDs I've seen, this one actually has sources (however little) and people have apparently actually talked about it before. Let's not shave it off before it can grow to something better! Ansh666 00:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes it would be rather rash. Of course, one should never Fear the Beard! -- Hillbillyholiday talk 01:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, what have I done..... Ansh666 01:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC) (p.s. eew, not the Giants...)
 * Apologies, I'd never heard of this famous rounders player. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 02:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Why delete? I see nothing even approaching a solid reason. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. So it's crap. Have you seen Special:Random? It has potential. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keeo. A fascinating topic that should not be discriminated against because of its rarity. Surely it deserves more than a single short dictionary definition? There may be cross-cultral/ religious apects to this phobia, or at least to its cultural expression, which have yet to be considered? It should also be made clear that there are two uses of the word - in popular usage the word part "-phobia" is typically used to mean discrimitaion, e.g. homephobia, xenophobia, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC) p.s. a very big thank you to Anthonyhcole - every one of my hits so far has produced something of real interest. Might be at risk of abandoning my watchlist at this rate (big cheer goes up....).
 * Mmm. I just did the same and the first 20 non-disambiguation pages were actually pretty good. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The nomination doesn't explain why this should be a red link. I reckon that the subject here is more beardism than a true phobia but there seems to be plenty to say about it.  Warden (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * As I suggested, I think it covers both at the moment. But not equally. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:42, 16 August 2013 (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.