Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Therianism

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 Redirect to Therianthropy. Nothing reliable to merge. —Centrx→talk • 21:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Therianism

Non-notable sub-sub-culture of therianthropy, who apparently label themselves "the cool group" —Ashley Y 02:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete —Ashley Y 02:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete TimCBaker 02:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete microscopic subculture that is both non-notable and just plain weird. Opabinia regalis 02:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Way too short. --Sbluen 03:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep Give this a chance... {{stub}} is there for a reason —— Eagle (ask me for help) 05:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge/Redirect to Therianthropy. See if they want it. SynergeticMaggot 07:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as dicdef. The apparent casual and recent invention of the phrase also suggests a neologism, particularly Google turns up several discussions compared to the set definition as claimed by the article. Google shows 78 distinct hits, out of 1,640 general hits, raising notability concern. Tychocat 08:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge/Redirect to Therianthropy and see it survives as per SynergeticMaggot. -(chubbstar) ^{— talk | contrib | 15:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)}
• Merge to Therianthropy. If it later develops into something, then it can be split off at that time. Ted^Talk/_{Contributions} 05:39, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Within Therianthropy, a good portion of us call our culture Therianism rather than Therianthropy. Same how Christianity and Catholism are alike, but different names and small notable variations. We mainly beleive in the same things, but alot varies between both. I also do not suggest merging them, as suggested. It's just a headache for us then, prolly resulting in a debate of/and deletion and reinstatement of this article. If we want to be defined as Therians under Therianism, let us be then; it's not bugging anyone. And yes, the article needs to be reworked. I didn't mean offense by 'the cool group', i was just saying that because I really think it is an awsome group to be a part of! ^^p Mix Bouda-Lycaon 05:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Therianthropy. this does not need it's own separate article.--Wispytearz 00:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — I was originally going to second merge to Therianthropy, but this article has no substantial content at all and definitely violates the NPOV principle ("cool group"? please!). So there's really not much here worth merging. Add a line to the Therianthropy article mentioning "therianism" as an alternate term, maybe, but I can't see any need for more than that. Miss Lynx 04:18, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless they can cite RS that they are indeed cooler (V). (changed vote) rootology 19:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — A non-notable group of people who can't understand what therianthropy is but want to fit into it anyway. Article also makes no sense; refers to "followers [of Therianthropy]". It's not a religion, folks. Wouldn't fit under Therianthropy because of misinformation and because it is not in any sense a commonly used term. --Kaiyote 00:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge inside Therianthropy, rewrite (Cool?) Spirou 22:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete or Merge (assuming any of it is verifiable using reliable sources) Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:29, 28 July 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.