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. Afterwards, I will redirect to Racism as reasonable editorial choice. Xoloz 16:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such phobia. This is a fork of "racism" or "xenophobia" at best, and original research at its best. See also the equally silly variant, negrophobia. Ezeu 22:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Previous AfD discussion result was keep on April 14 2005.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  23:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Previous AfD was 1.5 years ago. This is a new AfD with a different justification. Ancient AfDs are irrelevant. New "keep" or "delete" arguments are required. --Ezeu 23:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete as it stands. User:Nazikiwe added sources during the first nomination, but they've never been tied into the text. Gazpacho 23:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — per nom. Dionyseus 23:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — per nom. wikipediatrix 23:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep substantial Google hits. I agree that the term is nonsense, but unfortunately academia is littered with similar nonsense. Danny Lilithborne 00:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Counting Google hits is not research. In the prior AFD discussion, several of the web pages that Google Web finds were put forward as sources where people are discussing this purported phobia. (See also the critique of several of those sources by Rossami.) It was also mentioned that a lot of the web pages that Google Web turns up are joke lists of phobias, where this phobia is defined as a "fear of the return of 1970s hair styles". So ... Which sources are you actually referring to with your Google Web search? Uncle G 00:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not putting forth the Google test as research, only to show the word isn't made up. Searching -"fear of the return" still gets over 100 hits. And as you said in the previous AfD, afrophobia isn't a real phobia, it is a political buzzword and the article should reflect this. It shouldn't be deleted. Danny Lilithborne 01:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Showing that the word isn't a protologism is necessary for the dictionary article afrophobia. For an encyclopaedia article, we need to show that there is source material for an encyclopaedia article to be written. So ... What sources are you referring to? What sources discuss this political weapon? Uncle G 01:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Afrophobia is a word, a meaningless and inherently misleading nonce word without any real contextual meaning, that gives the guise of describing a phenomenon. Google turns up all kinds of made-up words, need we make wikipedia articles of them all?--Ezeu 02:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Even the sources cited in the article do not agree on the definition of this word. It can mean either fear of doing business/conducting foreign policy in Africa or racism. In other sources it's used as a synonym for racism. Anyway, the material in the article is all either POV, unsourced or OR. JChap2007 05:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• In the last deletion discussion, I argued that it should be sourced or deleted. Reviewing many of the recent versions, my concerns about sourcing and verification remain. While several references have been provided which use the term "afrophobia", they still do so in significantly different and inconsistent contexts. I can not yet find evidence that this is an accepted term with a stable definition. It appears more to be a neologism that each author makes up independently to highlight a point in his or her particular article.
  The contents of this page (prior to a recent and very severe edit) were unsourced and had many of the ear-marks of original research. There has been ample opportunity for this page to be properly sourced. If it can be sourced between now and the end of this deletion discussion, fine. Otherwise, delete. Rossami (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect or Merge to racism, phobia or xenophobia. --K4zem 15:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I suffer from this condition myself and I can assure you it's very real. I'm also afraid of a number of other hairstyles too, to the point where I'm sometimes unable to leave the house. I urge you all to do a service to other people with this condition and help document it as best we can. Alternately, if what we're after is an encyclopedia rather than a comedy routine, we'd better delete this for having no particular established meaning, per above. Friday (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It is empty now but the older version was something as essay about newly invented word. Pavel Vozenilek 20:49, 25 August 2006 (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.