Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oh my actual god


 * 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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 06:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh my actual god
I get about 93 hits on Google for this protologism, far short of sufficient to establish notability Daniel Case 15:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not a notable phrase; also offensive.--Anthony.bradbury 15:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. How could the fact that it's offensive be in ANY way relevant to this discussion?  Wikipedia is not censored.  If you don't like that fact, stop editing.  NOW. 205.188.116.138 16:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is a collective enterprise which determines, by consensus, both what is notable and what is appropriate. If you don't think there is censorship in Wikipedia already then you should try posting anything on a conservative topic. Wikipedia is and will be censored. george 19:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

94 actually, why not have it on wiki, I know more than 100 people who say it frequently, you probably know none. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaunhodge (talk • contribs)
 * Comment: (insert snow owl here) hateless 17:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete protologism, sources need to be verifiable, "I know people who say it" is not verifiable. NawlinWiki 15:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete this doesn't belong in wikipedia. I know lots of people who say Oh my dear lord, Son of a beesting and Holy shnikes but none of these merit an article. -- N  scheffey (T/C) 15:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Then maybe we can hear someone say it.  Fiddle Faddle 15:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NEO. Funny, but I've never heard anyone use it. --DarkAudit 16:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This saying raises troubling theological questions that could get Wikipedia into (even more) trouble with the Almighty. george 19:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless this has been written up in some reliable source outside Wikipedia, this isn't encyclopedic.  --Elkman 19:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Very, very, very, very stupid. Danny Lilithborne 20:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Good Lord! Delete, nonsense, fails WP:NEO. --Coredesat talk 21:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete' Wikipedia is not a dictionary. TedTalk/Contributions 01:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong actual delete per above. SM247 04:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all. "This phrase is not slang for anything". So...um... it's just words then? --DaveG12345 08:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually really in fact delete - blasphemy is neither here nor there. There's no entry for the vast majority of common phrases in English, nor should there be. This clumsy neologism doesn't deserve one either. AlexTiefling 12:18, 28 June 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.