Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glunk

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted - SimonP 19:50, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Glunk

Unreferenced, looks like an invented word. Kappa 12:52, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• This definition is rubbish, of course. It has already been added to BJAODN by Bonalaw. The word in actual fact appears to be onomatopoetic, mainly used for the sound of fluid being poured (c.f. "glugg"). Of course, a dictionary entry saying this belongs in Wiktionary, if anywhere. Wiktionary could create a better entry from scratch, and wouldn't want any of this article. Similarly, although the word is a family name there's no call for a name disambiguation page since we actually have no articles for people who are commonly known as Glunk. Delete. Uncle G 16:20, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)
• Delete - David Gerard 19:51, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy—patent nonsense. —Caesura 21:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy. I could swear I saw this go by on VfD once before. --Carnildo 04:23, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.