Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dhokke


 * 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 of the debate was Delete. --Tito xd (?!?) 04:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Dhokke
Neologism/hoax. Joyous (talk) 01:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Flapdragon 01:42, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. neologism. ERcheck 02:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. neologism. &mdash; Gaff ταλκ 03:18, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Question: can obvious neo-logisms like this be speedy?  Anyone knowing what template to use, please let me know on my talk page.  Thanks! &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 03:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. utcursch | talk 04:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Complete neologism. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete even if not neologism, is dicdef at best. KillerChihuahua 11:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Neologism and dicdef, certainly, but "a mnauever that is off the chains"? It's also nonsense. Delete. TheMadBaron 16:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete It's been found in several catagories it does not belong to (i.e. longest word) and has also been found randomly linked in other articles (i.e. Floccinaucinihilipilification) Axeman89 22:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I just removed it from Igor Pavlov.  It was through such a random link that I first noticed the article.  Joyous  (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per above reasons.  Newyorktimescrossword 04:26, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment article is an orphan.Geni 13:09, 28 October 2005 (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.