Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philoprogenitiveness

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 Phrenology#Supposed mental faculties. If the current redirect target is not found appropriate, one could later on take up discussions to change this redirect on relevant talk pages Wifione ^Message 10:33, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philoprogenitiveness

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is little more than a unsourced dictionary definition. Perhaps we should redirect it to wiktionary:philoprogenitiveness. Chris (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as suggested by nominator. It might be just possible to write an article on this subject, but it would be more likely to appear as a paragraph in phrenology. It can always be recreated if someone finds enough material for it. Dingo1729 (talk) 02:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been lying around for some time, so I don't think it was listed correctly at AfD. I think it's entered correctly now. Dingo1729 (talk) 04:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:50, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This seems to be jargon in a fringe field. The real article on the topic would be, maybe, "Parental instinct." Borock (talk) 09:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, but to phrenology. As far as I know, the word has no use in English outside of phrenology; and a Wiktionary link could be set up there. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be very reasonable except that the phrenology article doesn't seem to mention philoprogenitiveness. Redirecting there might leave a reader confused and without a clue as to what the word means. I agree that the word doesn't seem to be used outside phrenology. Dingo1729 (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Phrenology#Supposed_mental_faculties where you will now find Philoprogenitiveness as an example mental faculty. (It's all part of the service, here at Wikipedia.) Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The word means love of offspring and we don't seem to have a good article about this yet. While it's easy to mock phrenology, this source indicates that modern psychology hasn't got very far with the topic either: "despite the widespread everyday knowledge that mothers tend to love their children, the very phenomenon of powerful parental love seems to have baffled psychologists at a theoretical level.". It would be worth telling our readers this, if nothing else. Merge the article into the more common name of parental love (which currently redirects to agape - another archaic term), following our editing policy. Warden (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really do hesitate to disagree with Warden who is nearly always right (in my limited horizon), but while P. does indeed "mean" parental love, in practice it is just the name of an imagined brain-zone, a 'faculty' in Phrenology, so with deep respect may I say that merging it to the real topic of parental love would be missing the point. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as per nom. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:22, 15 November 2011 (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.