Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octopus cable


 * 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. I will userfy the page to anyone who wants to transwiki it. J04n(talk page) 01:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Octopus cable

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I initially proposed this article for deletion, but it was declined without an explanation. This topic is essentially a violation of Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Source searches are only providing tangential coverage (e.g., ). Northamerica1000(talk) 05:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:10, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - not an encyclopedia entry Gbawden (talk) 08:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - and merge into Wikidictionary because is a definition of a technical term (see PCMAG's definition ). Toffanin (talk) 18:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wiktionary EnTerr (talk) 03:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary, definition of technical term.--Staberinde (talk) 11:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Transwiki as a definition. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 10:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Transwiki I could find no reliable sources for this beyond definitions. However, the topic clearly exists and is a real term, so a transwiki to Wiktionary is the best course of action. --Mark viking (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * it looks like consensus was achieved. Why did this need to be relisted? -—Kvng 03:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Transwiki and agree this looks like a done deal. a13ean (talk) 18:26, 4 March 2013 (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.