Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phooning

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 of the debate was delete. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 08:00, Feb. 11, 2006

[edit] Phooning

• Delete: vanity
• Delete. Non-notable neologism. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, Urban or otherwise. --Kinu 08:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep eh? there's like 90,000 Google hits for "phooning" -- I think a couple of people might be attached to it. Adrian Lamo ·· 12:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure? The count comes to 72 for me, omitting duplicated pages, and even fewer relevant ones for "phoon". Most of these are titles of photos, and many are related to the phoon.com website. So while I won't argue that this small following doesn't exist, the Google hits are out of distortion because these are not, by and large, websites about or even discussions mentioning phooning. Many are individual photos uploaded to shutterfly, etc. before being sent in to the phoon.com website. Davilla 23:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep Weak delete as somewhat not-very notable by google hits. Turnstep 20:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Changed vote based on closer scrutiny of Google hits, per above. Turnstep 23:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Ardenn 00:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. feydey 16:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Vanispamcruftisement --kingboyk 23:19, 6 February 2006 (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.