Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aberzombie

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. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 14:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aberzombie

This has gone through both speedy and prod, both contested. (I apologize for the second prod in advance; I missed the first one in the edit history.) I believe that the sources provided still don't quite meet the guidelines in WP:NEO; if anything, it should be merged if the legal case is substantial enough. Crystallina 03:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• Merge with Abercrombie & Fitch. However, it is not clear whether it should be under History, Lifestyle brand, Controversy and criticsm, a new section, or divided between several of the above. The neologism goes well under Lifestyle brand because that is largely what it is a direct reaction to and because it is more a criticism of the customers and the marketing allure than of the company itself. The WIPO case and the amberzombie.com company seem more likely to belong in a different section, but I'm far from certain. —BozoTheScary 03:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. At best, this would be a weak wiktionary candidate. NTK 03:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per NEO.--Peta 06:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Protologism. Danny Lilithborne 07:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Question Are all neologisms deletable or just those that haven't been used by a major media outlet (or other notability criteria)? Or do all neologisms belong on a different wiki regardless? The policy suggestions are not clear to me. — BozoTheScary 15:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per Bozo; I would go with Transwiki to Wiktionary, but the discussion of the lawsuits probably wouldn't fit. JCScaliger 03:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per JC same!paradigm! 21:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)!paradigm!
• Transwiki to wiktionary. JASpencer 07:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - no encyclopaedic value. Wiktionary candidate. TerriersFan 02:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• delete, neologism, the lawsuit stuff can go into the Abercrombie and Fitch article. ~crazytales56297 00:27, 3 October 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.