Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balfour's Law

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balfour's Law

Article is unsourced, reporting on something that was just VERY recently made up (cf. this proof), ergo it is not an adage at all as it claims to be, it is original research and is a vanity/autobiography pseudo-article, in this case for the purpose of non-encyclopedic soapboxing. [Note: I do not make "non-noteworthy" claims; I don't believe in their relevance because WP:NN is neither Policy nor a Guideline, and thus not actionable.] — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 10:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
PS: Cf. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The Ralakan Corollary, which is pretty much the same thing.

• Delete Nonsense. 0 g-hits. Balfour was for Israel, not against it. --Xrblsnggt 11:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NEO as one of the endless Godwin's varieties.--Isotope23 15:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Yet another Godwin's Law "corollary" neologism with no verifiability or support. This ought to be a criterion for speedy deletion.--Grouse 00:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete protologism. JChap (talk • contribs) 01:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neologism with zero Google hits. --Metropolitan90 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as a neologism. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Attempt to cement idea come up with in Fark thread as some sort of neologism. Spurious social commentary and soapboxing, and nonsense "history of the term". Exo314 00:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as neologism; salt the earth for being a Fark neologism. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:02, 21 July 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.