Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broscience


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 02:26, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Broscience

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Neologism with only three sources, a quackwatch blog post that doesn't mention the term, and two of the most unreliable sources imaginable: rationalwiki and the urban dictionary. Mduvekot (talk) 19:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bodybuilding-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Crikey. Non-notable neologism.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing to see here. — Gamall Wednesday Ida (t · c) 14:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - It might be possible to have an article on the topic, but the present article is rubbish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:00, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - no reliable sources exist for this neologism; perhaps it is just too soon. Bearian (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - pile-on, fails WP:NEO and no clear redirect target (or reason for looking for one)... &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 23:31, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Agree with above reasoning.  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   20:58, 6 April 2017 (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.