Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bat bathing


 * 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. --Core des at 05:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Bat bathing
Neologism. A Wikipedia-less Google search returns 643 hits, none of which actually contain the phrase "bat bathing" in any kind of context. – ClockworkSoul 22:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NEO. EVula 22:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, WP:V, and WP:NEO. -- Satori Son 00:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, per lack of necessity for adding my own reasons. KEEP OUT NEOLOGISMS. -- Gray  Porpoise Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae 00:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete —  per nom of course. well said. JoeSmack Talk (p-review!) 05:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. Yes, I added the page. But I think the removal of the page would be, well, don't know exactly what to say.  You see, to me, to most people, bat bathing is something just not done or even contemplated.  But to others, those living in poor countries, perhaps, or those living in a manner closely attuned to nature, bat bathing is something that may be enjoyable and certainly provides entertainment. It might even be something you do on the way to getting dinner, if you eat bats. So, since Wikipedia is supposed to represent the world, and not just the developed world, I say it should stay in.  Indeed I added it initially knowing it was not a common thing to do in developed countries.  Listen, some new birds were discovered in South America and a new monkey was discovered in India.  Should there be no articles about them because they are not in our backyards?  Thanks, do what you want, but please consider what I have said.


 * As to "Neologism," I see that defined as "1) a new word, usage, or expression; 2) a meaningless word coined by a psychotic." As to 1) it is new, but only to you, with blinders on to the people in less developed nations.  They know about this, but they don't have the computers or even the English language skills to get on here and fill in the details.  Is it fair to wipe out the page under these circumstances?  Is Wikipedia not designed to be inclusive?  As to 2) well I hope you don't think this one applies in this case.


 * Please, fellow wikipedians, reconsider your decisions in this case. Thank you. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 06:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. Anomo 07:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Neologisms can be OK, sometimes. But this seems to be a protologism.  Pending evidence otherwise, Delete.  Regards, Ben Aveling 08:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What does "nom" mean? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 08:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Nom" = "nomination". Here, this AfD. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 09:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Specifically, the nom is either the person who proposed deleting the page (the nominator) or what they said (the nomination). Either way, 'as per nom' means 'I agree with what the nominator said when they proposed deleting this page'.  Regards, Ben Aveling 09:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * K, thx. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 11:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unfortunately, description provided by LegitimateAndEvenCompelling is an excellent description of Original research. AnonEMouse (squeak) 20:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. ThuranX 20:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Interesting idea, and I expect it to be featured on Fear Factor at some point - but it appears to be just made up, if LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (sorry, your username almost made me change my mind, but not quite) can't come with any references or source claims other than "maybe people in lesser developed nations do it". Bwithh 03:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * LegitimateAndEvenCompelling's current user page message just made my day. Bwah! Bwithh 03:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Happy to make you smile.  For convenience, here's what it says now: "Coming soon: why I am named LegitimateAndEvenCompelling." --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 04:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, I see you are open minded. Therefore, I'll tell you all I know.  First, this is not speculation.  The bat bathing incident was described to me by a good friend of mine who lived for years in Guatemala.  The description was vivid and the bat bather clearly enjoyed the experience.  My friend was taken to the mouth of the cave by native Guatemalans who had previous experience bat bathing.  So I did not make this up.  I am reporting it.  Its occurring in remote regions of Guatamala where people don't run off to write wiki pages doesn't mean it doesn't happen or it's not wikiworthy.  So again, I thank you for keeping an open mind, and I hope this helps. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 04:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Heya, LaEC. From what I've seen of you and your style, you seem to have the makings of an exceptional contributor. Unfortunately, even such an interesting subject as this needs to be verifiable. Eventually there's bound to at least be some kind of mention in a National Geographic article, I'm sure. – ClockworkSoul 04:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * LaEC, what are the Guatemalan terms for this activity? i.e. the non-English terms. Bwithh 13:42, 27 October 2006 (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.