- 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. Davewild (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fantasexuality (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Doesn't seem to be notable enough of a term, fails WP:NEO and WP:DICT. Dougie WII (talk) 12:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – Agree could find no reliable and verifiable information other than one site here [1]. As such, does not meet WP:Notability Shoessss | Chat 13:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, neologism, by the looks of it. Lankiveil (talk) 13:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
- Delete per Lankiveil. The topic may be valid, but it appears they are making up the term to describe it and no 3rd party references are available yet. Not notable until someone notices. Pharmboy (talk) 14:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Any potential for merger to unrequited love? Sarsaparilla (talk) 14:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't think that would fix the fact that it is original research, plus unrequited love is about real people, which is different than the topic of this article. Pharmboy (talk) 15:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah yes, I forgot to read the Center's text in greater detail: 'Many equate the love a fantasexual experiences with so-called "unrequited love." We here at the Center hope to quash this dismissive and insulting myth. Fantasexuality is not about "unrequited love," but rather about obstacles and illusion. In the fantasexual's reality, love would be requited if not for obstacles, obstacles which, oftentimes, the fantasexual is intentionally keeping firmly in place, or else obstacles that would need to be dismantled by some outside, freakish force that will most likely never happen. Fantasexuality is about the keeping in tact of illusion at all cost' Sarsaparilla (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't think that would fix the fact that it is original research, plus unrequited love is about real people, which is different than the topic of this article. Pharmboy (talk) 15:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I thought this article was about romantic love for a particular soft drink...expecially when I got to the "pop culture" section...Okay, no more puns. Complete OR. Source it, and I may change my mind. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above and Wikisexuality. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.