Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pants under skirt


 * 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 nomination was delete.  Sango 123  17:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Pants under skirt
This is a non-notable neologism, perhaps a case of WP:NFT, so delete. Note that I have added PROD, Cfred has endorsed it, and 142.177.155.159 has removed it. King of ♥   ♦   ♣   ♠  00:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC) style="color: rgb(255, 10, 0);"> Humphreys SPEAK TO MEABOUTTHE THINGS I MESSED UP June 29, 2024
 * Delete Defo not for things that will be made up in school tomorrow,!!! David <span
 * Delete per above. Besides, articles like this are so shoes under socks or some such crap. -- Captain Disdain 01:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep this is similar to the "skate punk" deletion yesterday, it is widely used and should not be deleted. This term is also used where I live, on the other side of the world so is not a candidate for WP:NFT. -- Librarianofages 01:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The "skate punk" article detailed a well established and commercially successful musical genre and its associated culture. This is just the definition of a "made up in school" expression. There is no assertion of significance other than the incredibly vague "the phrase has grown in use". --IslaySolomon 01:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment It very may of been made up in school but certainly not yesterday. -- Librarianofages 02:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:NEO. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 02:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources are cited, making this article unverifiable. Most Google hits for this expression refer to layers of clothing, as opposed to the neologism described in this article. --Metropolitan90 04:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn neologism. -- Alias Flood 04:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; see WP:NEO. Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFT and WP:NEO. &mdash; ዮም   (Yom)  |  contribs  •  Talk  •  E  06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete ludicrous nonsense Just zis Guy you know? 10:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Do we need an encyclopædia to tell us this kind of stuff? – Kieran T  ( talk  10:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Intresting phenomenon. Plinky 15:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Interesting phenomenon, and I agree that the style is patently ridiculous, but not something you should have in an encyclopedia. Stifle (talk) 15:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. A wonderful example of the sort of trivia that should not be mistaken for knowledge. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 16:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless references are provided. Wikipedia is not for things you pull out of your ass. WilyD 17:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Isn't this a copy of Old School Style? Kitia 20:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Article under standards. SM247 My Talk  22:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete neologism. ---Baba Louis 23:38, 5 July 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.