Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Horse


 * 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. Nousernamesleft copper, not wood 23:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Jesus Horse

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

1) The article's subject ("Jesus horse") does not meet notability guidelines for inclusion in Wikipedia. (See: Notability.) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary of slang terms. 2) The content is not suitable for an encyclopedia. (See:Reasons for deletion.) 3) "Articles about newly-coined words or terms" should not be included in Wikipedia. (See:Reasons for deletion.) The term "Jesus horse" is a protologism, a neologism that is not widely used. Wikipedia guidelines state that neologisms should not be used in articltes, much less to have an article on a neologism. (See Avoid_neologisms.) 4) Even if Wikipedia guidelines encouraged articles on notable neologisms, the term "Jesus horse" is not notable or widely used. Being used in a joke on Saturday Night Live does not constitute sufficient use for inclusion in Wikipedia. (See Articles for deletion (Tips on dealing with other material). 5) Quotes are not to be included on Wikipedia. If you want to quote a joke from Saturday Night Live it belongs in Wikiquotes, not Wikipedia. (See Articles for deletion (Tips on dealing with other material). Dgf32 (talk) 23:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not a widely used term for a dinosaur, and is based on a little known SNL joke.--Hazillow (talk) 23:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Not only is this a slang term, it is mildly offensive. It has no reason to stay in Wikipedia - Weebiloobil (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable Neologism. AndyBQ (talk) 02:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable neologism. DJ Clayworth (talk) 05:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable neologism. Maxamegalon2000 06:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nothing links there and it's a pointless article. - =Elfin= - 341 06:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep The reason for deletion is subjective, and is not in line with the Deletion policy, specifically the Reasons for Deletion. Notability is one of the weakest and most subjective of the reasons for deletion, and unless there are other compelling reasons for deletion, notability by itself is not sufficient for deletion.  2. The reason for deletion is unfounded. Use of this term has grown since its introduction four years ago, and is widely used outside of discussions about SNL as a sarcastic exagerration of attempts by fundamentalist Christians to promote young earth creationism in schools, and in society at large. 3. As a descriptive idiom that is widely used, this topic is justifiable as a Wikipedia article which explains the etymology of this idiom, and adds to the understanding of the growing and changing language in use today.Edgewise (talk) 18:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Gee, you got references for any of that? --Dhartung | Talk 19:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Note that Edgewise (talk) is the original creator and only significant editor of the article. Dgf32 (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable neologism. NHRHS  2010 NHRHS2010 03:18, 26 February 2008 (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.