Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masturbation addiction

: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 sexual addiction. Content under the re-direct if someone wants to add the sourced material. StarM 21:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

=[[Masturbation addiction]]=

:{{la|Masturbation addiction}} ([{{fullurl:Masturbation addiction|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masturbation addiction}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

This article is entirely unreferenced, concerns a possibly non-notable theory, and may constitute original research. John254 04:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Merge with sexual addiction. Jonathan321 (talk) 04:10, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge Agreed with above. A merger would be better suited rather than a complete deletion of the idea and article. --blurpeace (talk - contributions) 04:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to sexual addiction. The issue is the lack of references making it look like original research, merging will only transfer the problem.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 09:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to sexual addiction. There is nothing worth merging. The article is not hard science. - Richard Cavell (talk) 09:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Might as well face it, redirect per Esradekan. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Although I have heard of this, I think it's generally considered a brand of sexual addiction, so I agree with merging anything useful (and sourceable), if such material exists, and redirecting in any event. 23skidoo (talk) 16:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect per above. It sounds crude when I refer to this as a "dicdef". This seems like little more than someone trying to explain, in a Katie Couric interview, what the these two words mean. It's a sexual addiction, a process addiction, a psychological addiction, maybe even a pornographic addiction... it's all about jobs. Well, a certain type of job. Mandsford (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect - to sexual addiction. It is a form of it, perhaps, but unsourced and possible original research. The author can expand upon this concept at sexual addiction. (assuming it is sourced) DavidWS (contribs) 21:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. -- DavidWS (contribs) 22:07, 26 November 2008 (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.