Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sodartin

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 Deleted as not notable by user:Stemonitis. Non admin close. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 15:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sodartin

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

This article is entirely unreferenced, and concerns an apparent neologism. Apparently, we can't speedily delete it; the proposed deletion request would have been declined based on the author's objection to deletion on Talk:Sodartin. John254 03:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, keep, by all means. We want to have as many articles as we possibly can about words created by some students at a school somewhere, especially when Google has never heard of said words. Let's make sure we have in-depth biographies of every student who ever said it, too. And their pets. Tualha (Talk) 03:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NEO/WP:NFT. John254, you may wish to distinguish better between speedy deletion and proposed deletion in future. It is acceptable for article authors to dispute a prod; the next step is AFD, and here we are. --Dhartung | Talk 04:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete origional research--Sefringle^Talk 05:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per resons above. Oysterguitarist 06:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This is clearly neologism. The use of neologisms should be avoided in Wikipedia articles because they are not well understood, are not clearly definable, and will have different meanings to different people. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 06:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Wow, the article even admits that it was made up in school one day, and that it doesn't have a meaning. dilithium-powered delete. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as per WP:NEO. DraxusD 08:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete lol quite amusing the way it admits they made it up.Merkinsmum 10:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:NFT --Malcolmxl5 13:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• No-brainer delete but at least it made me smile. Iain99 20:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It's a neologism, so it can't be accepted here, but if they really want to get it somewhere on the web, Peevish's online slang dictionary is a far better place than Wikipedia. Also, Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day (or technically, not for things made up in college). If there are third-party, non-trivial sources that assert the importance of the word then it would be allowed here, but this article meets none of those criteria, and thus, it has to be deleted. But this should go to WP:BJAODN for now. --SunStar Net ^talk 21:47, 16 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.