Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Obsessive-compulsive disorder
This page is an archive of the Trash compactor discussion about the future of Wookieepedia's coverage of the topic(s) listed below, including whether or not to delete or redirect the relevant page(s). This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the relevant talk pages or in the Senate Hall forum rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was No consensus. Exiled Jedi 
(Greetings) 20:34, August 2, 2014 (UTC)
(Greetings) 20:34, August 2, 2014 (UTC)
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)
Again, nothing to separate it from the OOU condition...
Delete
- Manoof (talk) 16:00, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- something about a dictionary and what we are praguepride (Talk) 23:54, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- Trip391 (talk) 23:58, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I have OCD. It makes me vote "delete" on articles that are nothing more than English dictionary definitions. —MJ— Comlink 04:16, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
Keep
- I don't agree with this. Hosting an article on this subject has nothing to do with being a dictionary but rather serves our purpose of being a comprehensive in-universe encyclopedia. The condition exists in canon, is mentioned in multiple sources, and should be documented on this wiki. The fact that it shares the same name and definition of the real-world condition is irrelevant. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 05:30, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- In that case, why are we deleting other dictionary type articles that have no difference between the IU and OOU? There are other OOU mental conditions that I didn't TC because there was something that made it unique, such as a species' inclination to suffer from the condition. Manoof (talk) 05:52, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know what specifically you're referring to. If you're asking me to explain my rationale for deciding whether to vote to keep or delete something, I'll admit my method isn't a perfect science. I simply judge whether I think a subject has enough information to legitimately warrant an article. I will cite Stage fright as one that I don't think deserves an article. Although it's a real-world psychological condition, there's nothing in the canon source that describes this as being a condition, so anything that we would say about it would be pure extrapolation based on the real-world definition. This differs significantly from something like OCD, pyromania, or even multiple personality disorder, all of which are fully documented in-universe conditions. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 06:00, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Ok I think i get what you're saying, though I'll point out that there is nothing I can see that separates OCD and pyromania from the real world, with the only extra information being individuals who have the condition. Multiple personality disorder however is different enough in that it is normal in a species... Manoof (talk) 06:59, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- And I will point out, as I explained in the Pyromania TC, that I don't subscribe to the "same as in the real world" argument as an automatic determinate. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:05, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Ok I think i get what you're saying, though I'll point out that there is nothing I can see that separates OCD and pyromania from the real world, with the only extra information being individuals who have the condition. Multiple personality disorder however is different enough in that it is normal in a species... Manoof (talk) 06:59, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know what specifically you're referring to. If you're asking me to explain my rationale for deciding whether to vote to keep or delete something, I'll admit my method isn't a perfect science. I simply judge whether I think a subject has enough information to legitimately warrant an article. I will cite Stage fright as one that I don't think deserves an article. Although it's a real-world psychological condition, there's nothing in the canon source that describes this as being a condition, so anything that we would say about it would be pure extrapolation based on the real-world definition. This differs significantly from something like OCD, pyromania, or even multiple personality disorder, all of which are fully documented in-universe conditions. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 06:00, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- In that case, why are we deleting other dictionary type articles that have no difference between the IU and OOU? There are other OOU mental conditions that I didn't TC because there was something that made it unique, such as a species' inclination to suffer from the condition. Manoof (talk) 05:52, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:35, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Jorrel
Fraajic 06:22, July 15, 2014 (UTC) - Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 19:00, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- I may be a deletionist, but I think we need to slow down on this "We're not a dictionary" thing. We don't need to delete everything that can be found in a dictionary. Grand Moff Tranner
(Comlink) 22:54, July 15, 2014 (UTC) - Ayrehead02 (talk) 13:36, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
- No, the correct spelling is "C-O-D" Corellian PremierThe Force will be with you always 03:27, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
- Per Tope. Supreme Emperor (talk) 15:11, July 21, 2014 (UTC)
- Maybe I should keep, maybe I should keep JangFett (Talk) 15:13, July 21, 2014 (UTC)
- KEJ (talk) 09:13, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
- IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 05:25, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
