Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyrogear


 * 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. JForget 00:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Pyrogear

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is extremely short and cites no sources. The article is linked to only by a disambiguation page (pyro). Revision history consists only of poorly-spelled "content" added by a single author that was then reformatted by other users. A google search for "pyrogear" only turns up an unrelated company. As it stands, the article consists of a definition of a term that the author appears to have made up. Pyrochem (talk) 16:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Per this and this. Wonder whether it is a hoax. Pmlineditor      ∞    17:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete In any case, Wikipedia is not a dictionary --Cedderstk 18:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Materialscientist (talk) 10:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:BURDEN Miami33139 (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2009 (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.