Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Four Types of Pleasure


 * 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 both. I've userfied BlinkingBlimey's new text, so that he can recreate the article with it. Sandstein (talk) 12:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The Four Types of Pleasure

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Prod (by me) and prod2 (by User:DGG) removed after expiration by anon IP without comment. Concerns were "Non-notable neologism", "neologism at best, fits into "made up in school one day". Encourage a snowball close on this. Jfire (talk) 16:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete. Obvious non-notable neologism. It does look like it was made up in school in one day. Bart133 (t) (c) 16:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep/Merge with Lionel Tiger (but delete Who's Driving The Boat?). While this page bears all the hallmarks of a classroom spoof a bit of Googling suggests that it is worth further investigation. A straight-forward Google search returns only six hits. A Google Scholar search for "four types of pleasure" returns 10 hits and Google Books returns 8 hits. Not that many, but a quick glance suggests that the work of Lionel Tiger does have some impact on interface design and usability. Whether this was known by the original editors or not is open to debate, but I think the term, given it's application in fields outside of anthropology, is worth keeping in some way. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 16:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not surprised that someone has used the phrase "the four types of pleasure" in a scholarly way, but I don't see any evidence that the content of the article in any way reports on such use. In fact, your links reinforce just the opposite -- that it's just something made up one day, nothing worth merging. Compare "physio-pleasure, socio-pleasure, psycho-pleasure, and ideo-pleasure" with "Arbitrary Categorization, Correcting People When They're Wrong, Solid/Liquid Interaction, and Who's Driving The Boat?" Jfire (talk) 16:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. (I was just about to delete these as an expired prod when the prod tags were removed, and I then failed to recall the title to bring them here myself.) The current articles seem intended as a joke. If a notable term does actually exist with another meaning then someone else can start a fresh article on that. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - An article on an inside joke between members of a Mock Trial team? Kafka Liz (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, made up in school. A slow day in the computer lab, it appears. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've taken a few minutes and re-written the article to refer to Tiger's actual four types. It needs some references to actual impact to establish notability, but unfortunately I ran out of time. However, hopefully this is a start that someone else can expand on. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 17:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the effort Blimey, but I think it would have been better to wait until this AfD was closed and then recreate the article. Rewriting it to refer to a different subject entirely while the AfD is in progress muddies the waters and makes it confusing for any newcomers to the AfD. Plus, it's not really clear that what you have is sufficiently notable for Wikipedia -- it's a question that needs to be debated on its own, and now it risks becoming rolled up in this AfD. If other editors agree with me, I would suggest you consider reverting. Jfire (talk) 18:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. It would be wiser to purge the joke content, then start a new article with the real material, otherwise it is too easy for the jokers to revert it unnoticed back to their version in future. Perhaps BlinkingBlimey could userify the new content until the AfD is decided? Espresso Addict (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Userify and Delete per Jfire.  Lara  ❤  Love  05:35, 29 January 2008 (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.