Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LAMO


 * 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 Snowball Delete -- JForget  01:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

LAMO

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

Contested prod. Violates WP:MADEUP. Delete. Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 02:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Neologism, unreferenced, non-notable. WWGB (talk) 02:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

there is nothing wrong with my article. The miss-spelling has gotten popular with some of the people i talk to daily and is still growing slowly. This is notable. If someone can create LOL or LMAO, it was notable for them. Why cant mine be. As the Notability article states The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". "Notability is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity"" Its gotten popularity, so it counts as being notable. Its important because its gaining popularity. This is history. User:Sasuke781 10:20, 19 July 2008


 * Speedy delete Wikipedia is not for stuff we've made up one day, even if it has "gotten popular with some of the people i talk to daily." Movingboxes (talk) 03:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think this falls under a speedy criteria (not incoherent, not a hoax, not A7-eligible, etc.), but this is unsourceable and falls under Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. Respectfully recommend the creator read up on Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and reliable sources. Townlake (talk) 04:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. - Longhair\talk 07:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete not every mispelling merits an article. Teh phail. JuJube (talk) 07:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, article makes little sense, misspelling. How is this possibly notable? ®∂бЯέЩ§τЄґ  ♪  ♫  ♪  08:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete OMG a WP:SNOWball fight! {sigh} Popular with you and your friends a Wikipedia article does not make!
 * Note to creator In addition to the policies Townlake mentions above, you may want to read WP:Crystal: if the phrase is 'gaining popularity' and continues to do so until it becomes widespread and gets mentioned in reliable sources we can re-create the article. Until then though, keeping the page based on speculation about how common it will become is unnecessary. Also, above you quote that "Notability is distinct from... popularity" and in the next sentence say "Its gotten popularity, so it counts as being notable." Since 'distinct' means 'different', your argument doesn't seem to hold much water. Best, Olaf Davis | Talk 10:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above, then redirect to LOL as a plausible misspelling of "LMAO" Resolute 18:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't Redirect LAMO is close to both LMAO and LAMP... and LAME and LAMB and CAMO and other one-letter-offs. Townlake (talk) 01:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. Resolute 03:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete "The analogy was created by Ethan Monahan as pure accident and it stuck with him." So you wrote an entire article about a typo?  WFT?!  Mandsford (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. "Lamo" is a surname (as in Adrian Lamo), the space needs to be reserved as a dab page. Fothergill Volkensniff IV (talk) 01:15, 22 July 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.