Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/To Go To Selkirk

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 Gone to Selkirk Delete.--Húsönd 05:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Go To Selkirk

To Go To Selkirk (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notable neologism. prod removed by author with non notable source added. WP:NFT also applies. delete Aagtbdfoua 02:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary and Wikipedia is not for [stoner slang] made up in [college] one day. -- IslaySolomon | talk 02:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete, fails WP:RS, WP:NEO strikes again. --Kinu ^t/_c 02:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete potcruft. ^_^ Danny Lilithborne 03:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - nn neologism, 78 ghits. MER-C 05:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per IslaySolomon. SkierRMH,07:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• *Delete', self-admitted neologism. Fails WP:NFT. JIP | Talk 11:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Ah, but it has a source! Alas, still not notable. Though I will keep it in mind should I find myself in Winnipeg with money to spend on snacks. A Train ^{take the} 15:23, 15 December 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.