Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:06, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Orphan article. Google shows 3 hits for the term, all of them unrelated. Non-notable, unverifiable. Dave the Red (talk) 05:59, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete absent verification that it exists and is practiced by more than one person. Gazpacho 06:03, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Cleanup and rename to Patternology, which does garner at least 80 hits on Google, though they appear to be not all totally related.— flamingspinach | (talk) 06:20, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)- The article talks about the study paternity not patterns, the suggestion to move it to patternology (which is some new age healing technique, also un-encyclopedic) is not valid. I see no evidence in the scientific literature for paternology, delete--nixie 07:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Upon further inspection, you're absolutely right. I change my vote to delete. — flamingspinach | (talk) 15:31, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)
- The article talks about the study paternity not patterns, the suggestion to move it to patternology (which is some new age healing technique, also un-encyclopedic) is not valid. I see no evidence in the scientific literature for paternology, delete--nixie 07:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, neologism. Megan1967 08:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as neologism. FreplySpang (talk) 15:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect to feminism. The article is about neither paternity nor patterns, but paternalism (e.g. the idea that males run society) as a focus of sociological study. However, it also says that this area is "yet to be completed and endorsed with facts and experiental knowledge", ergo it is not independently notable. -- 8^D gab 15:16, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)
- Delete as neologism. There are no Google hits for the term as described in this article, and one vague hint that the word might be used somewhere in infectious disease or mycology (fungus) research. (I've checked a stack of online and dead tree scientific references, and can't find it defined anywhere.) --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 19:04, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Neologism. --Carnildo 22:38, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.