Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imaginary enemy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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, as unverifiable. If anyone comes up with sourced information they can either create a new article with that or add it to imaginary friend. If anyone particularly wants the history of this page to help with that they can ask me or another admin for it, but without sources there may not be much use for it. Petros471 19:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Imaginary enemy

Imaginary enemy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Based on google search, term is not used in psychology and is a neologism. Only pages that link to it are imaginary friend and a couple of unrelated articles on military terminology. Antonrojo 18:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I would say that it is not a real phenomena in psychology. A search for "imaginary enemy" and psychology in google scholar returns around 40 hits. The 40 that are actual psychological research use the term in the sense of 'hypothetical enemy' (as in 'the subject were told to picture a real and imaginary enemy'). Merging the armchair psychology into the equally-blighted imaginary friend is a partial solution, and possibly the remaining military usage might hold water. Antonrojo 01:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep since the term is used for a longer period of time (not a neologism) within the context of the military and in the media. In psychology the subject is indeed understudied.--Brz7 10:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with imaginary friend once verified Think outside the box 10:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Imaginary friend, if indeed it is a variation on that well established theme. Include a recommendation to cite with reliable sources (and tag the section appropriately with "citation needed"). Let the authors there either accept the merger and support it with verifiable sources, or delete the materials as unverifiable and non-notable. --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 17:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete if we have no sources. Slavlin 04:37, 18 May 2007 (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.