Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki dixit


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 13:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Wiki dixit

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Neo- or Protologism. No sources. Seems to be solely original research. Prod was removed without comment. --  Merope  08:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn neologism, 395 ghits. MER-C 08:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. Fails WP:NEO, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Ronbo76 12:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - WP:NEO. Besides, all Colbert wants is to get his coined words into Wikipeida. PTO 17:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - WP:NEO with no relevant sources that refer to the subject of the article. - Chardish 18:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete junk. JuJube 23:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh, JuJube, calling this stuff junk is an insult to the junk. Delete, then salt the earth and the moon... based on WP:NEO. &mdash; CJewell (talk to me) 18:29, 4 February 2007 (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.