Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tunc (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:33, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Tunc
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reliable sources, no indication of notability. As mentioned in a previous discussion, no record of the term in either the Oxford or Merriam-Webster dictionaries, either. --Oneforfortytwo (talk) 07:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Should be deleted rather than closed as no consensus as was done last time. If it's so tough to find sources to confirm such a usage (I've tried quite hard), then the topic is not worth an encyclopedia. Lourdes  07:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and replace with a dab page, as I recommended the first time. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:45, 9 July 2017 (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.