- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) clpo13(talk) 06:01, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- Psycho-biddy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not a notable term or subgenre. Koala15 (talk) 02:15, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Did you bother to check the references? There is already an entire book on the topic linked in the reference list. Just from a quick Google search, i quickly found another source that is an entire chapter in another book. And that's just from a quick glance, with only one of the four different name variations for this sub-genre. I think there's more than enough notability to be found for this sub-genre. SilverserenC 09:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm with Silver seren. According to this article in Entertainment Weekly, Fangoria ran an article about it recently. It's not like this is super-obscure. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: In Koala's defense, he was probably only looking for the specific term "psycho biddy" in the sources and upon not seeing it in all of the sources, assumed that it was original research. It's a mistake (since the other terms are in the lead), but a human one. A quick Internet search shows that the term "hag horror" is used far more often than the others, so we should probably move this to that title as the common name. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:57, 25 December 2015 (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.