Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diplobrat

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 Naconkantari 02:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diplobrat

Delete non notable neologism and origional research violates WP:NEO and WP:NOR. Also violates WP:CITE and WP:VERIFY.Strothra 04:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 05:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete slang dicdef neologism Ande B 05:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. DarthVader 13:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, neologism, original research, unverifiable. --Terence Ong 15:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable neologism. JIP | Talk 15:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete I've heard of it, but see Terence Ong's comments above. M1ss1ontomars2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 18:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki parts to wiktionary. There are sources for usage of this term, see [1], [2] (third paragraph, second section,) [3] (ninth paragraph) and [4], among others. I think it is a valid dicdef but probably not a full article. Grandmasterka 01:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. —Khoikhoi 01:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --MaNeMeBasat 05:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - i've added some examples in use...but this is getting out of hand - i can't verify all this American stuff, but i'm working on it. Poss transwiki. Pydos 09:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per nom. Zaxem 01:07, 6 June 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.