Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randaphobia

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. - Mailer Diablo 07:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Randaphobia

Prod tag disputed on talk page; Original research, non-notable neologism, (maybe WP:POINT too), 26 Google hits (on newsgroups and blogs). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - I believe this is Original research and thus merits deletion. --TheM62Manchester 21:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Made up at school one day. Though I am amazed that the article didn't find a way to link to Jimmy Wales. 205.157.110.11 22:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete dumb. Danny Lilithborne 23:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neoblogism. Gazpacho 01:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
• Do not delete because the "dumb" comment and the "made up in school one day" comment above (especially the first, which isn't even clever), may be examples of what this spoof "affliction" seeks to characterize. Adam smith's ghost
• Delete. Just some neologism invented by a Wikipedian. -- LGagnon 02:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This is not a neologism. The term "Randaphobia" goes back at least to 2000, since it shows up with a slightly different spelling in this article: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38ae7a071e83.htm . Adam smith's ghost
• Comment This is also may not be "original research" for the same reason - the 2000 article: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38ae7a071e83.htm. Adam smith's ghost
  • Comment I'm always suspicious when someone creates an account for the sole purpose of adding an article like this. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk
    • Comment I would be also, except that I am not the person who added this article, and don't know who that person is. I agree that the article as originally posted was guilty of all the raps that have been laid against it. Obviously, with the changes made since I no longer think that, even more so as I have become aware of other past uses of the term. Adam smith's ghost

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.