Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calvinist Wild Men


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Calvinist Wild Men

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

About a derogatory term for the subject of an existing article (WP:Not a dictionary). Doesn't seem worth merging into that article. JFH (talk) 18:10, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, article is unreferenced (two refs don't mention the term & the third is a discussion thread hence unreliable): search yields nothing. Not even worth redirecting.TheLongTone (talk) 20:31, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. External links currently on article are not satisfactory for reliability.  No news discussion of this idea nor any scholarly articles.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 21:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 14:25, 19 January 2013 (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.