Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douchebaggery

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 Redirected to douche. Non-admin closure per WP:DPR. Serpent's Choice 07:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Douchebaggery

Douchebaggery (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Neologism RedHillian 04:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy redirect to Douche, minimal variant on an already widespread insult, doesn't deserve its own article. Krimpet 04:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy redirect per above. BJ^Talk 06:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect without prejudice to recreation. Originally, I was going to say don't redirect, but the term appears to be noteable: [1]; however, the current article has defined it completely neologistically and it's a dicdef. Part Deux 07:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy redirect per Krimpet ck lostsword|^queta!|_Suggestions? 21:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy redirect ok, I too am convinced - redirect the thing. --RedHillian 23:16, 31 January 2007 (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.