Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Name blending


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 20:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Name blending

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

I have a number of "Google unique" keywords which I like to keep unique down to just one web page. But I would not use any of them as personal name! This is a non-notable new idea supported by a few blog entries. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I have heard of this happening; back in 1982, there was even a federal court case involving two people, Dean Skylar and Christine Ledbetter, who won the right to name their child Rachel Skybetter. But it doesn't happen very often, so far as I can tell.  Almost the entire article seems to be original research, sources notwithstanding.  You can give all the reasons you want as to why nameblending would be done, even though impractical, but unless you can show that it's a trend of some sort, it's not notable.  It's a lot easier to change your name to "Smith-Jones" than to "Smones", and a lot easier to change it back to Smith. Mandsford (talk) 23:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. It's interesting, but that is not a valid reason to keep it. Vquex (talk) 16:19, 24 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.