Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schrödinger's Copyright

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. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Schrödinger's Copyright

Non-notable neologic term. 0 Google hits. Haakon 10:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - original research unless it is published and agreed to by the academic community. - Richardcavell 10:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Arbusto 10:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. PJM 11:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Ok. I guess I will have to popularise the neologism first. Crosbie Fitch 15:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• That's exactly how Wikipedia works; it reflects subjects that are notable. RGTraynor 16:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom SCHZMO ✍ 20:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. —999 21:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. DarthVader 00:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --DV8 2XL 15:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. And yes, Wikipedia is used to note things that are verifiable and notable, not to make them so. — TheKMan^talk 23:18, 30 April 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.