Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apartionalism

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. Bucketsofg 21:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apartionalism

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

Neologism, apparently created today, by a chemistry Junior writing for a college newspaper. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Let Mr. Gu stick to chemistry. --DLand^TALK 01:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. First published yesterday?! Yes, neologism, no references except the made-up-in-the-school-paper-one-day. Shenme 03:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - clear protologism failing attribution - Peripitus (Talk) 03:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Ugly term, will never catch on. Plus all the above reasons. - Arch NME 18:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for all the above reasons. NawlinWiki 19:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NEO without prejudice to proper recreation in the future (somewhat doubtful). The term was invented 2-3 days ago in an op-ed piece by an individual who has published previous op-ed pieces in The Stanford Daily (see [1]). It may be appropriately recreated if the term catches on or becomes the subject of controversy. Until it does, ... -- Black Falcon 17:48, 8 March 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.