Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Covidiot


 * 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.  Sandstein  08:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Covidiot

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is nothing but a WP:DICDEF. Therefore, restore the soft redirect to Wiktioary. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 07:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 07:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:NEO states that articles on neologisms that have little or no usage in reliable sources are commonly deleted, as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term. This term has received tremendous amounts of coverage, so this does not apply here. Furthermore, the term itself clearly passes the GNG. CJK09 (talk) 08:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NEO. The term is just vague abuse with no clear meaning.  The article claims that it means people not following official advice but the sources indicate that it's mainly directed at people hoarding toilet paper.  If it gets into issues like the (not) wearing of masks/face cloths, herd immunity and sunbathing then it will become controversial as the official advice is not consistent across different countries. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Official advice is not only "not consistent across different countries", it has at times and in places been just plain inconsistent. In the US early on they said not to wear masks if you were not sick. Different jurisdictions have different views on use of masks in open air outdoor areas. This is also a major term of abuse, and considering it is most heavily used for people who are not in any way in violation of any law or guideline, just acting in a way people do not like, it is not really a notable term we need an article on.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:43, 26 May 2020 (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.