Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blerg


 * 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 Nuked as a NN neologism by Lucky 6.9

Blerg
Wikipedia is not a dictionary and we have a guideline against neologisms, of which this is a patent example. There is also no verification here through reliable sources.--Fuhghettaboutit 06:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC) Lucky smells socks. Guess what Nic's total edit history is...? - Lucky 6.9 08:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Terminate with extreme prejudice. Users who spend so much time creating so little content just leave me shaking my head in wonder. - Lucky 6.9 06:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Annihilate - sigh, contested speedy deletion, seems the author believes this crud is worth keeping--Aim Here 06:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, already! Neologism. Gods above, just nuke it. &spades; P  M  C  &spades; 07:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable neologism. If Wikipedia is not a dictionary, it most certainly ain't an urban dictionary.  Rockpock e  t  07:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Non-notable, worthless rubbish. Davidjk 07:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong un-delete. very-notable, anything but worthless rubbish. Nic 08:00, 1 November 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.