Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pretendian

Pretendian
Slangdef, and the source referenced is very much untrue. Weird hoax, probably written with an agenda. --fvw *  19:25, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Wiktionary. It's a definition and not an article. However, if the article is truly a hoax, then delete --SoothingR 19:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Hardly a hoax. Over half a million google entries. The documentation may need some work, but that's all. Has the potential for being an article if given a chance for other contributors to contribute. This is a real, albeit weird, phenomenon among some misguided white people. 155.84.57.253 19:31, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So why did you make up a source reference? --fvw[[User talk:Fvw|*]] 19:33, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Copied a bad reference. This has since been corrected. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. 155.84.57.253 19:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I get only fewer than 87 unique hits in english. If the only source is an online dictionary, than that would seem to indicate that this is just a dictionary definition. Move to Wiktionary. -Willmcw 21:19, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

The one source provided is just an EXAMPLE. I will happily move this entry to Wiktionary. 155.84.57.253 20:45, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. The article is far more than just a definition. Yes, this is a contentious topic, Wikipedia does not censor. The article relies exclusively on published secondary sources and is far better sourced than many well-established articles. Yuchitown (talk) 19:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown