Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blurt-site


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Blurt-site

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Page is a neologism which exists only within wikipedia, was coined on the date of afd nomination and is entirely original research Clovis Sangrail (talk) 16:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I should also have said - was listed and contested under WP:PROD, and not deemed to fit under a CSD category. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 17:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete As a non-notable neologism, failing WP:N, made up April 6, 2010. Wikipedia is not a dictionary of every neologism anyone makes up. (Speedy deletion should be possible for neologisms, but apparently is not, as long as there is somw content which is not patent nonsense, since someone feels per "CSD non-criterion 4" that "Neologisms. New specialized terms should have a wider hearing." OK, it has had that mandatory hearing, and wasted the time of the nominator and other editors, now delete it. Edison (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, blatant and obvious word made up one day. ~ mazca  talk 16:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, standard case of WP:MADEUP. Stifle (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Snow delete. Wow, I've never seen such a carefully prepared neologism. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:41, 6 April 2010 (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.