Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Queunliskanphobia


 * 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. Rlendog (talk) 20:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Queunliskanphobia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly-sourced article about a phobia. I am unable to find any reliable sources that cover the subject in any detail. Fails WP:GNG. - MrX 20:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. &#8213;  Padenton &#124;&#9993;  21:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#8213;  Padenton &#124;&#9993;  21:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete per WP:CSD, also WP:NOTNEO. This "phobia" isn't even listed at phobialist.com (not RS of course, but a very lengthy list making it dubious it is any officially recognized phobia) nor oxford dictionaries. Not even a mention at Google scholar.  I'm calling Complete Bollocks.  &#8213;  Padenton &#124;&#9993;  21:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. per nom. This appears to be a new slang term with a lot of Urban Dictionary type websites coming up in the search results. Wikipedia is not intended to be a dictionary and since this article serves no other purpose than to define a non-standard term, it should go...    Ormr2014 | Talk
 * Delete - as we're not a dictionary, Perhaps shove it on Wiki-Dictionry or whatever the hell it's called. – Davey 2010 Talk 00:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, as it fails WP:SOURCE and WP:PROVEIT: the only reference given in the article directs to a blog page; in turn, the blog page links to a [|"slang dictionary" search] which results in no found terms, and [|its entry] in Urban Dictionary, where it is not only used ungrammatically but incompletely as well. Additionally, according to WebMD, a site verified by many certified medical professionals, there is no such thing as Queunliskanphobia. Shrillpicc100 (talk) 01:32, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. A reliable medical source would be required for this, and there is none.--Srleffler (talk) 02:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete At best this is WP:DICTIONARY. --Jersey92 (talk) 22:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - At best WP:TNT. Standards for psychology sourcing are higher than a blogspot.mx site. It's also a WP:DICDEF. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 02:02, 18 May 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.