Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dordle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dordle

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

I added a prod tag, but the creator removed it. This does not appear to be a term recognized by any body of importance. Google does not show that this is a term used by anyone (in the context described here) other than the one person linked to from this page. Is not notable, and has no verified, reliable sources. I (talk) 21:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

  • delete agree with nom. --neonwhite user page talk 21:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No notability beyond what is on this site. Neon White just deleted the one other reference I could find to "dordle", that being on the dubious Good Magazine (where one had to search for "dordle", the given link was the main page), which merely quotes an award that Nik Daum got - and doesn't even mention a dordle. Tanthalas39 (talk) 21:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I checked the link and could find no mention of the term so i assumed the ref was uncorrect, i was unaware a search might reveal a mention and did not perform one. Regardless, linking to a broad website is not consistant with policy on external links. --neonwhite user page talk 01:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete appears to be a non-notable neologism, delete per WP:NEO. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 23:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Ford MF (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Dordles have been published in the following magazines: GOOD Magazine, Nov/December 2007, Issue 007, pg. 116; Empty Magazine, Issue 10, pgs. 102-103. There is no reference on their sites, except as artist credits for the noted issues. Photo proof of publication can be found on the artist's blog at [1] and [2] Menudomucho (talk) 01:06, 31 December 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.