Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technopathy

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. --Coredesat 07:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Technopathy

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

"Technopathy" is a neologism that does not seem to exist with a reliable source. Its existence as an article invites comic book readers and similar to contribute original research on what "technopathy" is or is not. Earle Martin [t/c] 12:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Further note: when you remove "wiki", "Wikipedia", "blog", "forum" and "Heroes" (many of the hits seem to be Heroes fansites) from your search, Google hits for this term drop to only 700, and start revealing that there is already a real word called "technopathy" that refers to some form of bone disorder in animals. -- Earle Martin [t/c] 12:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep as at least 3 years old; interesting. Bearian 18:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
    Sorry, "interesting" isn't a valid keep. -- Earle Martin [t/c] 12:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Neologism, lacks real-world, reliable sources. Jay32183 20:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - when the only source listed for an article is a back issue of X-Men you know it's in trouble. I've wasted five minutes of my life I could have spent sleeping or eating trying to find a single legitimate source for this: after a trawl through Google, there are hundreds of sources but without exception they appear to be wikis, blogs and fansites. "Interesting" is not a great 'keep' argument btw — iridescenti (talk to me!) 20:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep appears to be a popular term among role playing gamers, by the looks of the google hits. At a guess there's at least one RPG gamebook out there that defines the term which should be added to the list of sources. Article should also list the TV show and film it mentions as references also, which makes three independent uses of the term, which makes it borderline notable in my opinion. JulesH 21:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Article appears to be almost entirely original research. I tried to find some reliable sources, but came up empty. Even if we did have an RPG sourcebook or something like that as a reliable source for a definition, there's already a short definition at List of comic book superpowers and a category of fictional characters with that power. I think that's more than sufficient coverage for this term.Chunky Rice 21:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Neologism, and many of the works of fiction referenced (such as the Matrix series) never actually use the term. *** Crotalus *** 00:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - a fully notable article within the Superhero genre. Find some more references, and this article will be fine. dposse 01:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - the term is used in Sky High (2005 film) and is a well known term in the science fiction genre. It has been used in a variety of sources, which although not cited as proof in the page are there. Thus in my opinion, it's not a neologism. It may need citations added, but that doesn't mean it isn't noteworthy. Jacobshaven3 01:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
    • That's actually what a neologism is. The word is used by a particular group but does not yet appear in dictionaries. Also, provide the sources now, don't just assume some are there. Jay32183 03:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Wait, someone is actually saying a term being used in Sky High makes it notable?! JuJube 04:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NEO. JuJube 04:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, neologism that only has a little over 3,000 Google hits. The exact term seems to be slightly ill-defined, as befitting a neologism - with two other synonyms and a different interpretation used by Marvel. -- Mithent 14:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The fact that the only reference is an X-Men comic says it all, really. RFerreira 07:43, 6 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.