Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/High decline

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 delete. – ABCD 00:23, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] High decline

Delete - neologism, dicdef at best. FreplySpang (talk) 01:04, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - agree. original research --Anonymous Cow 01:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, neologism, dictionary definition. Megan1967 08:22, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I concur. --Coolcaesar 19:16, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Whatever you may think about Waterworld, it doesn't seem to meet the stated criteria. RickK 23:03, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, dicdef. Wmahan. 04:22, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC)
• Transwikied This belongs in Wiktionary. It is a useful term and totally removing it seems to be a waste, unless of course it's already in Wiktionary. --Fritz9000 07:19, 20 Apr 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.