Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPod wedding

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 Prodego ^talk 02:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IPod wedding

Rarely used term, non-encyclopedic information, not verified, etc — Wackymacs 14:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete with low Ghits--Jusjih 14:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -- Bill (who is cool!) 16:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as neologism. --BillC (who is not cool) 16:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete (Currently) non-notable neologism explained in a messy article. -- Kicking222 16:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, but move to a more appropriate title. This is something my fiancee and I are considering, and it's covered in a variety of bridal magazines. Legitimate phenomenon, legitimate article. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 19:18, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete -- Longhair 22:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Neologism, iPodcruft. It's about as legitimate as creating an article titled "Microwave Thanksgiving." OhNoitsJamie^Talk 01:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Just because its a stupid fad dosent mean people shouldnt have acces to knowing about it. I say keep it but shorten to say, only a definition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.7.166.171 (talk • contribs) .
  • Comment If a notable entry is a definition-only, it should be transwiki'd to Wiktionary; however, since this is a non-notable neologism, it doesn't even belong there. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 17:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
    • What are you using as a definition of notability? --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 20:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
      • 587 Google hits isn't that much, most of them referencing one CNET article or something else. People have been using digital technology for photography/music in weddings for years (long before the iPod). It's still a neologism with little to show for other than one CNET article that a few other sites have picked up on. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 21:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
        • So the Bridal magazine cutout that my fiancee has plastered to the fridge doesn't help, either? ABC news, perhaps? i mean, most other things with this sort of media attention would be fine, I'm not sure where the animosity toward this in general is coming from. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 21:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
          • I'm sure that when the microwave oven first became popular there were numerous articles in notable magazines about how it could make preparing a large meal (like Thanksgiving) easier. The bottom line is that it's still just a neologism/Heloise Hint about one of the many DIY ways to save money on a wedding. It's simply iPodcruft and not worthy of an encyclopedia entry. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 01:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This is not notable, you could always make music mixes with old technology. Not enough demonstration that it is a real social phenominon. HighInBC 16:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per HighInBC. —Khoikhoi 17:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Deleted as idiotic marketing neologism of no notability Bwithh 22:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as per 202.7.166.171. Abeg92 22:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete but make a note on iPod Article, as a curious fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.13.31.30 (talk • contribs) .

• Keep - informative as an encyclopedia article. If it has to be deleted, keep the info at least somewhere on Wikipedia. CoolGuy 18:32, 1 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.