Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aquative


 * 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   delete. JForget 00:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Aquative

 * – (View AfD (View log  •  AfD statistics)

No sources. Article history indicates author has " seen this word used occasionally in editorials,website forums and in at least one political debate" meaning this is more or less original research. WP:PROD was contested, and I declined to speedy delete it as nonsense. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Fractionally above vandalism. &mdash; RHaworth 01:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Looks like nonsense to me. ChildofMidnight (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't get it guys. I agree that it's something made up and silly that does not belong on Wikipedia, but I don't find it to be incomprehensible gibberish, which is why I already declined to speedy delete it as nonsense. Beeblebrox (talk) 09:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete I had originally PRODded the article as I thought it could possibly be a hoax and couldn't find any sources to confirm the definition. The original author has had ample time to add references in order to verify the info and has not done so. Gathering all the good faith I can, this still remains original research at best. --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 18:24, 7 December 2009 (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.