Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infructuous


 * 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  05:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Infructuous

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

It is only a dictdef. Anthony Appleyard 09:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete neologism. JuJube 13:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and this already has an entry at Wiktionary.--Fuhghettaboutit 16:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete neologism, dicdef, unencyclopaedic tone. Guy (Help!) 16:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the word does exist, but dicdefs don't belong in Wikipedia.  Hut   8.5   18:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.--Rudjek 23:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete since it's a definition, and definitions belong in Wiktionary, where it's already defined. If there were encyclopedic information about topics such as why the word is more often used in India, its history there, writers who popularized it, then the word might merit an encyclopedia entry. The author of the article can expand the Wiktionary entry. Fg2 01:53, 14 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.