Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Definition of Sariacc

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Consensus delete and speedy delete. Taxman ^Talk 19:25, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Definition of Sariacc

We don't need definitions of words used in a single issue of a webcomic. Neither does Wiktionary. Googling finds a couple hits; only two are in English, and at least one of those is a misspelling. —Cryptic (talk) 00:50, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. this isn't even a definition, this is a request for a definition and an attempt at communication. author apparently unaware that people who can create their own web comics can also create their own words. Nateji77 01:18, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete for attempting to communicate (one of the criteria), or not. However, it's clear that this is not an article at all -- not a dictdef, not a discussion, not an article -- and yet it has category tags. (Some folks'll put cat tags on anything.) Geogre 01:50, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • The category is a side-effect of the deletion notice. Uncle G 02:47:14, 2005-09-09 (UTC)
• Delete. This is not an article. -Splash 01:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I beileve they're confusing it with sarlacc. Sean 02:05, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - "attempt to communicate" isn't actually a speedy guideline, only "attempt to communicate with the named person" Ashibaka (tock) 02:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Not only is this not an article and a request for a dictionary article, but the cartoon referenced clearly says "Sarlacc Pit". Delete. Uncle G 02:47:14, 2005-09-09 (UTC)
• Delete Delete Delete. Aside from how inexplicable this article is at face value, the cartoon doesn't even say "Sariacc". This article makes the Sarlacc cry. RMG 02:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, dicdefs should be deleted, and thus requests for dicdefs too. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:02, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Looking at the QC comic line again, I realized my faux pas, mistaking an "l" for an "i". Thanks and kudos to Sean for pointing me in the right direction. It is obvious to me now that the QC author's intent with the phrase was "SARLACC Pit of Platonic Frustration", and he was not making up a word "sariacc"... I am now going to go hide in a dark place, and lick the bleeding, torn holes in my self-esteem, received from the vicious and savage 'tongue-scourging' my attempt at a "Request Article" received. If I had known that Wikipedia editors and administrators were this bloodthirsty, brutal, and maliciously vindictive, I never would have submitted the request in the first place. Now I have learned my lesson well: Stay 'AWAY' from Wikipedia, and never soil the pristine cyberspace of Wiki with my detestable and malignant presence again. To the Wikipedia Adminitrators: I recommend, to prevent such obviously abhorrant and disgusting "non-Articles" from appearing in the future, please change the "put up a request for it" link on the Search:No page with that title exists page to *not* point to the "Wikipedia:Requested articles" page. This will prevent such droogs and drubs like myself from dirty-ing the unsullied expanse of Wikipedia with deplorable "non-Articles" like my "definition of Sariacc" request. Thank you.
  • Nice try for some sympathy, but common sense should have told you that wouldn't be a valid encyclopedia article. I'm sorry if your feelings were actually hurt, but a thick skin never hurt anyone. I'm speedying this one too folks. - Taxman ^Talk 19:25, September 9, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.