Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fameism

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. - Mailer Diablo 09:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fameism

Article is about a neologism (Google turns up 9 hits, most whch do not seem to be related to this "term"), could also be seen as original research. Prod removed without reason Wildthing61476 12:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per WP:V and WP:NOR ST47 12:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The article may well be original research, this does not make it any less true. The term 'Fameism' is a neologism, but the description of 'fameism' is none the less an occurance that is happening today. As an original piece of work it could be a template for incorporation into mainstream language and culture. Google turns up 22 hits, 2 of which are related to this 'term'. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.105.119.144 (talk • contribs).

• Comment The above author's only edits are to this AfD and the article nominated. Wildthing61476 00:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This discussion isn't a referendum on whether the word is a good word, a useful addition to the language. It's not even a discussion on whether the term will ever merit its own article. We're simply discussing whether it does currently. ♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The 2 hits related to this term are on Urban Dictionary and have been created by the same person who made the entry on Wikipedia. There are no hits from reputable sources.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.107.13.250 (talk • contribs).

• Delete Protologism, original research, and there is already a well known english word for this topic, it's called "Celebrity", and we have an article on that. --Xyzzyplugh 00:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete original research does not belong on Wikipedia, period. Danny Lilithborne 01:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Danny ReverendG 05:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete in accordance with my comment above; NN neologism. WP:NOT for things made up in school and all. If the word catches on and someone creates fameism in a few years and that hits AfD I may or may not feel differently, but now is not the time. ♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:43, 29 August 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.