Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bloredom

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. Mailer Diablo 02:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bloredom

Appears to be a protologism/neogolism with 34 google hits, delete per WP:NEO. Hansnesse 03:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete deserves to be speedied as advertizing for a club or organisation without notability. Bobby1011 03:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment a user, presumably a sock puppet, has removed deletion tag several times. Most of the google hits are pornographic websites that have the word as part of a massive list designed to pop up on a wide array of searches. It isn't even a notable neologism.Bobby1011 03:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Bobby1011 --Ruby 03:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete Jim62sch 04:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete --Terence Ong 05:45, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete as non-notable unstable neologism, i.e. protologism. Adrian Lamo ·· 06:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as self-admitted protologism. "The word has been coined by two German students"... do I even have to say it? --Kinu ^t/_c 06:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Arbustoo 09:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. TVXPert 15:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Amcfreely 19:04, 19 February 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.