Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wagflation


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 19:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Wagflation
Was proposed for deletion as a neologism and original research. The OR is gone but it is still a protologism per the zero ghits for the word wagflation. WP:NOT applies. Delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 20:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Well, as far as I am concerned, no sources and zero ghits are a huge neon sign that says "Original research". Sandstein 20:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks like OR to me. YechielMan 02:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of the above. --Richard 07:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Any hints on where I could present this if it is considered OR? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.137.119 (talk • contribs)
 * You could try one of several economics journals. Uncle G 15:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - OR. JASpencer 10:55, 23 September 2006 (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.