Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winklevied


 * 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   Snow Delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Winklevied

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable unsourced neologism. Previously PRODded as such and dePRODded without comment. Pam D  22:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Obvious Delete Per nom  Jay Jay What did I do? 23:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow Delete per nom. Lugia2453 (talk) 23:09, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 19:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:SNOW and WP:NEO - Lacks reliable sources. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of notability, sourcing, possibly made-up. The only source I could find was an Urban Dictionary entry that is virtually identical to this. One may have copied the other, or both may be from the same individual. Cnilep (talk) 02:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 15:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete after a quick search, no sources let alone independent or reliable. Mkdw talk 09:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow Delete - per WP:NOTNEO. Source searches are providing zero coverage in reliable sources for this term. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:55, 6 January 2013 (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.