Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cute formalism

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 11:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cute formalism

Lacks primary sources. I don't think it's so much crufty as it is non-notable.  freshgavinΓΛĿЌ  07:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Upon searching google, the term "Cute formalism" gets aprox. 111 hits, which many of the links are from free dictionaries, livejournal/blogs, and wikipedia itself. Right in the article it states that one guy came up with the term 5 years ago. For a term that is 5 years old, you'd think if it were gonna catch on, it would've by now! --lightdarkness ^(talk) 08:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as ill-fated neologism. Adrian Lamo ·· 09:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Neologism Forbsey 11:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. ¡Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 21:26, 18 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.