Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glomp (4th nomination)


 * 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 keep. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 21:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Glomp

 * Glomp was nominated for deletion on 2005-09-07. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".  For the prior discussion, see Articles for deletion/Glomp (2nd nomination).
 * Glomp was nominated for deletion on 2006-03-08. The result of the discussion was "keep".  For the prior discussion, see Articles for deletion/Glomp (3rd nomination).

Re-listing. This is a non-notable, unverifiable, and unnecessary neologism. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep it's a notable phenomenon and the article has sources. Danny Lilithborne 01:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep it is verified, article has sources. It is notable - "glomp" has become very common in internet slang, even outside the anime/manga community. google test comes up with almost 2 million hits. compare with something like leet, which has about 3 million, and Godwin's Law, which has about 300 thousand. --Yaksha 11:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep "Glomping" is a major component of the Anime/Manga subculture. This has passed muster twice already, and is getting more and more support each time.  Would somebody PLEASE put a note on the talk page that this shouldn't be put for deletion again? --Kitch (Talk 12:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions.  -- Roninbk t c e  # 12:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per previous AfDs. Nothing has changed, its still equally notable. &mdash;   Da rk Sh ik ar i   talk /contribs  03:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep just to make the point clear, as per all good arguments now and before.--SidiLemine 11:08, 10 October 2006 (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.