Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nukebidding


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 11:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Nukebidding

 * — (View AfD)

Appears to be a neologism; I can't find any reference on Google outside Wikipedia and its mirrors. Nothing at all on Google Groups. Blorg 11:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Maybe the description is too vague, but isn't this just the already well-known practice of sniping? Certainly appears to be a protologism with no apparent usage outside of Wikipedia and mirrors. ~Matticus TC 11:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as neologism. JPD (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn neologism. MER-C 13:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - fully agree with the nominator. This term doesn't even exist outside of Wikipedia. Jayden54 14:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ← A NAS  Talk? 16:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not appear to be a term in general use and as noted by Matticus, article describes auction sniping.
 * Speedy Delete. Was this in retaliation of losing a bid on eBay?  B  e  a  rly  541  23:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Superdelete, as not even a notable neologism. All article on google appear to be linking to WP; the guy may have may the term up. -Patstuarttalk 13:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. NeoJustin 22:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete pointless. FirefoxMan 22:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Auction sniping, which is the phrase usually used for the activity described in the article. No content worth salvaging. Tubezone 10:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Coment - do we really want to redirect for a term that doesn't exist? -Patstuarttalk 16:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, having a redirect might dissuade someone from trying to recreate the article. Also, I've seen the term used, although the person using it probably made it up off the cuff. Tubezone 08:47, 10 December 2006 (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.