Talk:Polycule

Hi. Wrong. Needs deletion.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary

Read it. Now.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 18:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Further reading: Wikipedia:One sentence does not an article make. Specifically,

This page in a nutshell: One sentence "articles" and "essays" that cannot be expanded should be deleted.

and

Wikipedia decision-makers are urged to make one sentence "articles" a speedy deletion category as there is no purpose for them. While one sentence may make a good summary, it truly is not an encyclopedia article. Neither, for that matter, are two sentences.

Ironically perhaps, I've removed the first of this article's three sentences, as nowhere is the shout-out to Connectivity (graph theory) explained in context — poetic metaphors have no place in an article, and indicate original research.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 15:31, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

For the moment, I have relented and simply edited the first line to remove the (unfounded) mathematics claim. But now that I look further, neither of the two cited articles is adequate even to launch a "sub-stub." Kae Burdo did not coin the term "polycule," and does not cite where it was swiped from, so (the "no original research" thing) we have only Polycule's founder to vouch for its accuracy. On reread, I've cut the last sentence due to synthesis: the cited source does not use the word "polycule."

At best, the remaining content should be rolled into Polyamory, from whence it springs.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

More media coverage

There is enough mainstream media coverage since 2018, notably a NYT Magazine piece about a 20-person polycule, to give polycule a standalone article. Jenny8lee (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)