Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Googlazyness


 * 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. --Core desat  05:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Googlazyness

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Beyond being only a dictionary definition, this term is a protologism, without even the web hits needed to be verifiable as a neologism. Wikipedia is not for terms made up one day. Article was prodded and prod2ed by other editors, both tags removed by author without comment. Serpent&#39;s Choice 04:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete obviousl Neologism that isnt even popular.--Dacium 04:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and send to BJAODN. This is obviously a joke. --Candy-Panda 04:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and RTFM. Pomte 04:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as a non-notable neologism or joke. J I P  | Talk 05:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFT. Resolute 06:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Nonsensical Neologism that doesn't even have a single Google result. Metrackle 06:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete junk. JuJube 12:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NEO, nonsense, WP:NFT. Terence Ong 12:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Nonsense/vandalism.  Gan fon  13:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as neologism; and the article sounds more like a wannabe-dictionary definition, not an encyclopaedia article. - Iotha 22:21, 22 January 2007 (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.