Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Papermachete


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Papermachete

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't believe how long this has been here. Not to be confused with paper mache, or Papier-mâché, this claims to be a device to cut paper, but no sources indicated usage exists. And in spite of the tag on the page, it is not at Wiktionary. Was brought up at WT:AFD. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 17:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You might note the name of the original creator, who has only ever made this one dubious edit, back in July 2006. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 17:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete This is ultimately a non-notable neologism and doesn't appear to be in wide enough use to merit an article or even a redirect. There is no coverage of this term in any reliable sources.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 17:06, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete This should definitely be deleted as a non-notable neologism, if not just downright something that was made up. The fact that there is not a single source that uses this word at all, and what the article creator's username was, I'm tending to lean towards the latter possibility.  Rorshacma (talk) 17:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Paper cutter a Google books search does turn up at least two clear hits of a Machete used as a paper cutting device (Though both relate to the same post-war publisher/printer) - possibly redirect Paper machete as well. Striking last - it's clear this is a common misspelling so the current redirect should remain. Though an older diff on that redirect shows this account's intentions  Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 18:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Duely noted on the explanation of the account name used to create the article. I would still hesitate as far as keeping this as a redirect.  I would need to see the sources you found to be sure, but just having had someone use a machete to cut paper in the past does not keep this from still being a neologism with no widespread use.  Rorshacma (talk) 19:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Both "The Story of The Outsider and Loujon Press" by Jeff Weddle, and "The hunchback of East Hollywood: a biography of Charles Bukowski" by Aubrey Malone discuss how Loujon press relied on a machete for cutting the pages rather than a professional-grade cutter, I'm not saying it's a common term but redirects are cheap and whether it redirects to paper cutter or to papier-mâché (as a common misspelling), a redirect will be more useful than a "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Paper machete in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings." page resulting from deletion. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, No redirect per nom. and Tokyogirl79. There is no need for a redirect, not even a scintilla of quasi-notability for the mentioned usage. --Bejnar (talk) 21:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:09, 29 September 2012 (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.