Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shmilfke


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 01:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Shmilfke

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

Article is a neologism. Did a search and cannot find reliable secondary sources from which an encyclopedic article could be written. Article was previously proposed for deletion in 2008 and deleted then so am bringing it to AFD as the only remaining option Davewild (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hardly any results come up after a quick internet search, most not even relating to the word as described in the article... there's not even an entry for it on urban dictionary.  --Aka042 (talk) 19:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note this this page was previously deleted on May 15, 2008 as an expired PROD. •••Life of Riley (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, belongs on the Urban Dictionary if anywhere, not here. WP:V -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a non-verifiable neologism. Seems like someone just smudged two words together like clay. MuZemike 22:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete wp:neologism, wp:not for things made up one day, wp:reliable sources, wp:verifiability. ¨¨ victor   falk  05:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NAD and WP:NEO. JohnCD (talk) 14:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not for things made up in one day - an unverifiable protologism. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  00:53, 4 February 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.