Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hanson Shuffle

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. Sr13 08:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hanson Shuffle

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

Neologism at best. Appears to be made up though, as Google gets only a handful of hits for the term, none of which have anything to do with polaroids. Mark Chovain 06:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as failing WP:N, WP:NEO, etc. Speedy if possible; the only assertion of notability for the term itself seems to be The Hanson Shuffle is a term that is widely used in Redmond, Washington, meaning it isn't notable at all. --Dhartung | Talk 07:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete: Nonsense, "original research" would be dignifying it too much. Vanity or friends vanity. Hu 17:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Hoax. "... in the "answers" section on the Polaroid Web site, the company says that shaking photos, which once helped them to dry, is not necessary since the modern version of Polaroid film dries behind a clear plastic window." [1] ~ Infrangible 21:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete this probably hoaxy local neologism - fails attribution and notability. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 03:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note to admins from nominator: Can we just speedy delete this one now? Mark Chovain 04:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

comment - under what WP:SPEEDY criterion would this fall? Note that a hoax is explicitly excluded from the patent nonsense criterion. -- Whpq 21:45, 18 July 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.