Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheening


 * 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. per WP:SNOW. There's no chance of this closing any other way. Mgm|(talk) 10:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Sheening

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-encyclopedic. This is a dictionary term (WP:NOT), that appears to be invented by the author (unable to locate other references to it), and presents no indication of notability of the subject term to justify its inclusion in Wikipedia. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete per nom. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 04:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a growing term in popular culture. Used by many young viewers of ther show Two and a Half Men it is fair to say the term should be linked to the show, character and actor after whom the term has been created. Though a quick google search may not result in many hits as of yet the term is under review with urban dictionary and is expected to be added to the web site in the next few days. --Jilah (talk) 04:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — Jilah (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * KEEP - second vote: I agree to keep this definition. It will grow in length and detail as it becomes a popular definition itself. The World known Facebook Site also has a fairly professional Group called "The Sheen Academy" and speaks of this very thing. (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=39302849797&ref=mf)I would suggest keeping this definition.--JillianAWeedmark (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — JillianAWeedmark (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment To the two new editors who have come to support the article: Please read Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Also, please read Wikipedia's "notability" guideline. Something is "notable" (worthy of having an encyclopedia article) if it has received significant coverage in "reliable sources". The Urban Dictionary and MySpace Facebook are not considered reliable sources. Please take a moment to familiarize yourselves with the guidelines I've linked to, and see whether you can find reliable sources that discuss the subject of "sheening". Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 05:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete no hint of notability. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - wikipedia is not a dictionary Clubmarx (talk) 05:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per everyone above. SMSpivey (talk) 05:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a dictionary, nor is it a place for non-notable neologisms. Even if these two things weren't an issue, the sources on the article are not substantial enough to confer notability on the subject. An example of a neologism whose definition is in Wikipedia because it is in fact notable is truthiness. Its article contains a bevy of third-party references which give it enough notability for the word to have its own story, beyond its definition. As for Sheening, for now it seems better left in Urban Dictionary.SMSpivey (talk) 09:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is WP:NOT an dictionary. Crystal ball prognostication that a term "will grow" is not an effective argument in AFD. Facebook is not a reliable source. Edison (talk) 05:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--another one. Drmies (talk) 05:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I did not say the term will grow I stated that it is growing. Perhaps people are not up to date with current slang. Another reason for it to stay. It is a valid conversational word and though this is a defintion it should be linked to the show and the character. I am not relaying inacurate information. I also sugest you come up with a better reason than as per above. Come on people create your own arguments.--Jilah (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable sources or signs of notability (Urban Dictionary is a user edited dictionary that anyone can add words to).  TJ   Spyke   06:16, 19 December 2008 (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.