Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chewbabyte
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 of the debate was Delete, possible speedy. kingboyk 00:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chewbabyte
No google results for this article - may be a speedy delete candidate as patent nonsense. Either way, it doesn't measure up to Wikipedia standards... I cast my vote to Delete --Viridian || (Talk) 06:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete Invented word, and not even a clever one. Fan1967 06:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Under which criteria for speedy deletion? -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Most likely under "patent nonsense" (CSD G1) -- I had considered listing it as a speedy candidate under that criteria, but decided to err on the side of caution and list it here instead. --Viridian || (Talk) 06:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, should have specified. I think Viridan's right to label it as Patent nonsense. Fan1967 06:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it's Patent nonsense - it's got things like subject-verb agreement, and as a whole it does make sense while being completely unencyclopedic. Though if you were to tag it {{db-nonsense}} and it got deleted, I wouldn't shed any tears. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if it's not Patent nonsense, it's still wrong. I've added an Accuracy tag on the page. Fan1967 06:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it's Patent nonsense - it's got things like subject-verb agreement, and as a whole it does make sense while being completely unencyclopedic. Though if you were to tag it {{db-nonsense}} and it got deleted, I wouldn't shed any tears. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, should have specified. I think Viridan's right to label it as Patent nonsense. Fan1967 06:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Most likely under "patent nonsense" (CSD G1) -- I had considered listing it as a speedy candidate under that criteria, but decided to err on the side of caution and list it here instead. --Viridian || (Talk) 06:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Under which criteria for speedy deletion? -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable, unstable neologism, i.e. protologism -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- From the article: "derived from a chat I had with my friend". I don't think I need to say where I stand on this. -- Saberwyn 09:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete as patent nonsense. I won gold in Athens for sticking my foot up my own ass might be chock-full of verb-subject agreement but it would also be patent nonsense. Deizio 12:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete agreed. -- Alpha269 15:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - Nonsense --lightdarkness (talk) 20:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per well argued nomination. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:54, 6 March 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.
