Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boanthropy
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 - deleted - SimonP 05:23, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
Boanthropy[edit]
As another user also pointed out on the talk page, I can't find any reputable online references for this on google. Delete as a made-up word unless somebody can find a good reference. Thue | talk 20:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: is Calvary.com not reputable? [1] The link also give other references, and is the #1 google hit. Kappa 23:52, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- (Weak) Delete; it's an obvious made-up compound after the model of lycanthropy; we might as well have cameleopardanthropy, where you fancy yourself a giraffe. Unless more evidence of notability is forthcoming, get rid of it. -- Smerdis of Tlön 16:38, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Gets exactly four hits on Google, all of which are on evangelical websites. Mooooooooooooooooooooo! Delete. Edeans 21:52, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Seems more like 3,630 hits to me [2]
- Delete. Non-notable... --Neigel von Teighen 21:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, delusions suffered by major Babylonian kings are notable. Kappa 15:31, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Is there any reliable sources who actually use this word when describing his condition? And are there any reliable sources sources who say he thought he was a bovine? The wikipedia article on Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon doesn't, for one. Thue | talk 16:19, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete unless more references can be provided - SimonP 05:23, Mar 30, 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.