Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roxxorz

Roxxorz was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to redirect the page to Leet.

Roxxorz
Another Leet word. --LeeHunter 00:54, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete: Useless at best, useless at worst. Just useless.  Geogre 03:14, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nonsense Leet dict. def. jni 07:39, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Covered better in the Leet article. Kinitawowi 12:51, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. --*drew 12:54, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Already in leet article. Passw0rd 15:40, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * (I don't see mention of it in the article)Pedant
 * Delete. "amoung the famous computer language leet speak" -> speaks for itself. rernst 16:46, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless, and already covered in Leet. Nadavspi 18:32, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Substub and redundant. --Lucky13pjn 18:43, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. At best, a dicdef. --Improv 20:53, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not merit its own article, its just another leet construction. This alone has no potential to become encyclopedic  &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  21:55, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Leet. Not even a dicdef, doesn't even say what the silly word means, and Leet already covers it. But, why put these up for VfD rather than just making the obvious redirect? Anybody can make a redirect, it covers the argument that someone might want to look up the word, it can be easily reversed if disputed or if someone can write a real article, and (I don't know why but) redirects are usually stable and don't seem to spark revert wars. Darn, I really wanted an excuse to say "de-l33t" but since I don't want it deleted, I can't... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 13:17, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Leet. Andre ( talk )A| 14:14, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect Not notable by its lonesome. :) RaD Man 06:42, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect While it's not worthy of its own entry, it is a popular term in Leet. Mo0 21:37, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect  The term should be defined though, and something about it's etymology.  I haven't read the article Leet nor do I intend to.  It's quite beyond my scope.Pedant 22:35, 2004 Oct 23 (UTC)On second thought, I decided to read the article, and it doesn't seem to mention Roxxorz (I am tEh n00b eDiTZZor)  if theis is redirected to Leet it should be factored in (defined too) to the article to which the redirect points.  I don't think 1337/leet/elite or any other version of the same is a "computer language", famous or not, thoughPedant 23:39, 2004 Oct 23 (UTC)