Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insider


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 02:59, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Insider

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:DICTIONARY. Unsourced. Even if it should be on here, it'd probably be better to nuke it and start over. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 03:22, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete agree, it appears DICDEF. Various short meanings cobbled together to make an article, with no sourcing to speak of. Oaktree b (talk) 04:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:20, 21 October 2022 (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.