- 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. TIL what Rule 34 is. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Glasses fetishism ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Sure, it exists; if it exists, there is porn of it. But there is no significant coverage of the topic in reliable sources. The article's sources are 1) a fringe psychoanalytic case report on a man with various fetishes, including a glasses fetish. 2) a two-sentence dictionary definition. 3) two blog posts about "megane", a Japanese term for attractive anime characters with glasses. It's debatable whether "megane" is even the same thing as glasses fetishism - finding a trait attractive is not really the same as having a fetish for it.
A WP:BEFORE search turned up nothing better, mainly passing mentions and random self-published websites. There's one case report on Pubmed from 1966 [1] - obviously not WP:MEDRS, a couple sentences in a tabloid [2], and some lightweight stuff about megane on Kotaku [3]. Basically, all that RS has to say about this subject is that it's a fetish for glasses and it exists. That is not enough to justify an article. SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 23:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 23:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:SIGCOV. Yes, Rule 34 applies, but no, there's insignificant coverage in reliable sources. Bearian ( talk) 01:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Found out that a man was recently jailed due to his uncontrolled glasses fetish, other than that the internet is silent on this fetish. MistyGraceWhite ( talk) 11:54, 3 May 2020 (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.
- 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. TIL what Rule 34 is. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Glasses fetishism ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Sure, it exists; if it exists, there is porn of it. But there is no significant coverage of the topic in reliable sources. The article's sources are 1) a fringe psychoanalytic case report on a man with various fetishes, including a glasses fetish. 2) a two-sentence dictionary definition. 3) two blog posts about "megane", a Japanese term for attractive anime characters with glasses. It's debatable whether "megane" is even the same thing as glasses fetishism - finding a trait attractive is not really the same as having a fetish for it.
A WP:BEFORE search turned up nothing better, mainly passing mentions and random self-published websites. There's one case report on Pubmed from 1966 [1] - obviously not WP:MEDRS, a couple sentences in a tabloid [2], and some lightweight stuff about megane on Kotaku [3]. Basically, all that RS has to say about this subject is that it's a fetish for glasses and it exists. That is not enough to justify an article. SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 23:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 23:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:SIGCOV. Yes, Rule 34 applies, but no, there's insignificant coverage in reliable sources. Bearian ( talk) 01:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Found out that a man was recently jailed due to his uncontrolled glasses fetish, other than that the internet is silent on this fetish. MistyGraceWhite ( talk) 11:54, 3 May 2020 (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.