Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academic incest

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. bainer (talk) 08:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Academic incest

Doesn't seem to be a notable term (and seems rather incredible). 547 Ghits, but I think they're actually just comparing hiring people who haven't been at other universities to incest, not actually trying to coin a neologism, and it clearly didn't spread for that reason. Rory096 05:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. More patent nonsense than rory gives it credit for being --Check 05:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Nonsense; uses a web blog as source. Cuñado - Talk 07:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Better yet, it cites a forum as a source. --Alphachimp ^talk 07:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. DarthVader 08:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The article references are poorly chosen, but a google search shows that the phrase has been used in serious contexts such as a keynote speech by the VC/President of the University of Canberra[1]. I would delete the entire "Alternate meaning" St. Andrews section though as a silly nonnotable local phrase. Bwithh 11:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• delete. It takes more than a handful of instances of two words appearing together to make a genuine neologism.--cjllw | TALK 14:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Bad sources. Does anybody remember how "The Incest Song" goes? - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 17:06, 26 May 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.