Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullycide

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. -- Steel 18:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bullycide

an original essay about a nonnotable neologism from one book.`'mikkanarxi 03:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep it contains plenty of sources to be able to stand alone --RedPoptarts 03:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - nn neologism, 948 non-wiki ghits. MER-C 03:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Odd. I get 9,570 google hits using your link, MER-C. Can you double check your google results? Anyone else see different results? AubreyEllenShomo 22:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per notability, sources. Sharkface217 04:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Such as? MER-C 06:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - obvously just made up.--Deglr6328 06:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neologism. Danny Lilithborne 06:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Classic OR: someone invents a concept and then makes an argument for its cultural impact. Delete Allon Fambrizzi 06:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
• Delete The article itself says its a neologism. Gelston 10:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, original research. Terence Ong 13:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a dictionary of neologisms. --Brad Beattie (talk) 14:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. --Sable232 15:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep 18700 Google hits, a book with the term in the title, and several independent references cited. Hardly "original research" or "obviously just made up." Most words in the English language were neologisms at one time or another. This one has been in use for 5 years per the references. Bullying is a common cause for both suicides by students and for revenge shootings in schools. Either type of death is the subject of the article. Edison 20:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Being in book title does not mean widespread acceptance. Journalists coin catch phrases all the time. `'mikkanarxi 20:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete - neologism, not much evidence of notability outside of the book that invented it. --TexasDex 21:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's verifiable, and I count 9,570 non-wiki google hits. AubreyEllenShomo 22:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - considered a valid term in pscyhology by the pscyhology Wiki project. Endless blue 23:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I believe the topic is notable and sources can be provided. TSO1D 01:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Nom statement doesn't appear to hold up. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Note WP:NEO. The subject is verifiable, but does it really have a place here? -158.123.138.50 17:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete essay, neologism. Anomo 19:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep requires cleanup.SYSS Mouse 20:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Only about 470 unique ghits, and the usage of the term is quite confused; the most common usage seems to be death due to bullying, but the book uses it differently. Some of the cited references don't even use the term. I suspect this material is covered better elsewhere in Wikipedia. --Brianyoumans 23:29, 9 December 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.