Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unibrow

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 of the debate was Keep. Tawker 05:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unibrow

Unsourced, original research, and impossible to accurately define (article says "abundant hair between the eyebrows"- what is abundant and what is not?). Probably a majority of people would have joined up eyebrows to some extent if they didn't pluck (so it is not really an unusual characteristic of eyebrows). Merge any useful info to Eyebrow (which needs expanding anyway) and redirect. Arniep 23:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as insensitive to the football team unencyclopedic original research. Bucketsofg✐ 23:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above Tom Harrison ^Talk 00:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per nom, BECAUSE so many people have or would have them. The different acceptances among cultures has the potential for an informative article above and beyond what Eyebrow should cover. — GT 00:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep -- article has plenty of links from other articles. That suggests it's not exactly original research, but rather a common term (which is probably still unsourced). In any event, it isn't causing harm. --Elkman - ^(talk) 00:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Just becuase quite a few (not a huge number) of articles link to it doesn't necessarily mean it should be a separate article to eyebrow. Arniep 00:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - though I've only ever heard the term "monobrow" used for them. close to a third of a million google hits suggest that this is worthy of an article. Grutness...wha? 02:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I'm not sure why this would be considered original research, it's a pretty well-known topic with hundreds of thousands of Google hits. According to this, the word is cited regularly by the press and has been in use at least since 1988. Plus, the article has Helga Pataki. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable sort of facial feature. Haikupoet 03:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - a legitimate, notable topic. I don't view this as legitimate research. But please, if there are any Wikipedians out there with a unibrow, think of the children and shave or pluck the bridge between the eyebrows. This has been a public service announcement by Mark 06:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

don't shave or it will certainly grow back twice as fast and twice as thick. Arniep 19:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per above. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 14:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep If someone wants to be specific, let them. DougOfDoom ^talk 01:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Alphax ^τεχ 04:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for reasons articulated above. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 10:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Not original research, and a notable sort of topic. --Knucmo2 19:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Definitely keep It's encouraging & noteworthy that many people regarded as beautiful are unibrowed. Ghosts&empties 14:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Interesting information._Anglius DeleteShould be merged with Eyebrow.--Anglius 03:36, 6 May 2006 (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.