Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anchor Bimbo

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 1 July 2005 06:39 (UTC)

Anchor Bimbo
Neologism. Gets 22 googles. Also, do we want a list in Wikipedia of 'people occasionally called bimbos'? Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 15:46, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - one wouldn't think so, would one?  Especially when the author adds names and photographs of real people as examples! --Mothperson 15:54, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Neologism. --Durin 16:12, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ted Baxter Delete. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 17:01, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neolobimbo Neologism. - Mgm|(talk) 17:43, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this is a term used by media observers to reflect a trend in broadcast journalism that is somewhat disturbing. I also have some plans to expand it. -- Spotteddogsdotorg 00:23, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment OK I have nominated it for a speedy delete. Happy now? If that doesn't work my vote changes to Delete- Spotteddogsdotorg 1 July 2005 00:57 (UTC)
 * Delete neologism. JamesBurns 03:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete The original article shows the heavy biases from a user whose actions led an admin to quit. And it is neologism. ErikNY 13:14, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. -- Jonel | Speak 15:21, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment with reference to Spotty's plans, what's the speed dial # for the Wiki lawyers?  --Mothperson 15:26, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - just let this get deleted. It's got far more support for deletion than, say, Vince DeMentri.  I'm confident any recreations of this will be treated just as harshly as recreations of DeMentri's article.  That is, they'll go *poof* immediately. -- Jonel | Speak 00:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Neologism! Toasthaven 28 June 2005 16:10 (UTC)
 * Comment - yeah, that's convincing. --Mothperson 28 June 2005 17:20 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Gibberish, nonsense, joke, POV, sexist, not encyclopedic, bad faith article creation in the first place by somebody out to WP:POINT. Kaibabsquirrel 29 June 2005 02:22 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.