Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Occulture

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Occulture

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

Not notable. Lack of sources. Neologism. Vassyana 08:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - plenty of ghits. andy 10:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Yes, it as 200k googles, but yes, it's also an unsourced neologism. Guess which is more important :) >Radiant< 13:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It's been tagged forever with no references added. In my Google search for "occulture -pop -wikipedia" (there were a lot of hits for "Pop Occulture" that didn't seem related to this article), I ended up with 24,500 hits, but only 591 of them were unique (as found when I tried to jump to page 900 of the Google results). The term seems to be used in many different ways, as well. Propaniac 16:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Unsourced neologism, dicdef, speculative (Most commonly within pop culture the term was widely believed to have stemmed from Genesis P-Orridge who is said to have coined the term--yikes, that's a lot of weasel words). Wikipedia:Search engine test is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Heather 16:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Unsourced neologism. daveh4h 01:24, 10 May 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.