Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hexacameralism

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 Multicameralism. There is clear consensus that stand-alone articles are not warranted. Any sourced information that may be merged into the target is available from the histories. Randykitty (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hexacameralism

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No indication the subject actually exists. Meatsgains^(talk) 01:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page because it also seems to be a word coined for Wikipedia (see discussion with The Professor (Time Lord) and Uncle G below):

Redirect to Multicameralism; while it might be real, it is certainly not used enough to warrant its own page. Thanks and don't bite me, DePlume (talk) 03:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 03:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge to Multicameralism since the only instance seems to be Yugoslavia. Even there, no one calls it hexacameralism (as per Google search and Google Scholar search for "hexacameralism Yugoslavia"). So the whole article might be WP:OR. If so, Delete entirely. I just added two references that discuss the (five or!) six chambers of Yugoslavia after 1963. --Trimton (talk) 08:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- That's because the -alism form is seemingly a coinage made up for Wikipedia, and not actually a word, and the commonly used adjectives are the -al forms combined with a noun, as in bicameral legislature. Uncle G (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - bicameralism and multicameralism as -alisms do exist, check out the refs in Multicameralism. --Trimton (talk) 08:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - The -alism form (note singular) that is here, in front of us, that you just talked about. Uncle G (talk) 20:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If this page is to be deleted and redirected to multicameralism, shouldn't pentacameralism also be redirected to that page? (The Professor (Time Lord) (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC))[reply]
- That's not really a word, either. A name that actually exists is pentacameral legislature or pentacameral parliament, but the only one such was the Parliament of Yugoslavia. Uncle G (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The Professor (Time Lord), you're the article creator. Did you make the word(s) up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trimton (talk • contribs) 2021-04-09T08:58:20 (UTC)
  - Not really. The words "pentacameral" and "hexacameral" were already present on the Parliament of Yugoslavia page (and had been there for years) so I extrapolated the words "pentacameralism" and "hexacameralism" from them. (The Professor (Time Lord) (talk) 09:21, 9 April 2021 (UTC))[reply]
    - That's "yes". "-ism" is productive, of course, but you should be aware that there has been strong resistance to made-up "-ism"s on Wikipedia over the years. That's not a wise idea. Uncle G (talk) 20:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - ok thanks. FYI hexacameral and pentacameral were inserted there in 2014 by an anonymous editor see diff, without citation. The editor might have taken the word from a book. it was 50 years ago after all and lots of sources from then aren't accessible online. But the lack of citation makes that unlikely. therefore delete.
~~Redirect~~ Delete both this and pentacameralism as well as Tetracameralism. Reywas92^Talk 18:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I will copy info to Multicameralism but Uncle G would be correct. Reywas92^Talk 17:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects are cheap and prophylactic, but the name of this subject has been invented out of thin air for Wikipedia. It's not genuinely a word. Uncle G (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Multicameralism, that article is too much a dictionary definition at present. It would benefit from having an inclusion of the Yugoslavian practice in it. That article as written is atrocious. I also have to admit I see no particular reason why Multicameralism is considered to exclude bicameralism. From any logical perspective there are ultimately two types of legisslatures, unicameral ones, and multicameral ones. The fact that a vast majority of legislatures that are not unicameral are bicameral should not from a logical perspective cause us to act as if the big jump is from 2 to 3. The true change in nature is going from 1 to 2.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's consensus to not keep all these n-cameralisms, but do we just delete these articles or redirect them to Multicameralism?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without redirect as per WP:PROVEIT: There is still no evidence that the words for 6, 5 and 4-cameralism are used by notable sources. The only Google Scholar matches at all are for 4-cameralism, and even there, the only mentions are in two lower tier academic papers and one dissertation. If notable sources use the terms offline, no prejudice against someone recreating the pages as redirects to Multicameralism. Trimton (talk) 04:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to multicameralism. I think that article would be really improved if we gave it an intro section about multicameralism in general, and moved the content from the AfD'ed articles into the sections: one section on tricameralism, one section on tetracameralism, etc. Kokopelli7309 (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2021 (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.