Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikerosion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 00:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikerosion

The article title is a protologism -- that is, a word that has recently been invented and has not even gained enough linguistic currency to be considered a neologism. The article is also a POV personal essay, and covers much of the same ground as Criticism of Wikipedia. It had been turned into a redirect to Criticism of Wikipedia, but we generally try to avoid letting Wikipedia be used as a method to cultivate the usage of protologisms and neologisms. So I nominate it here for AFD. Ξxtreme Unction|yakkity yak 12:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Somebody needs a 'blog. And a few whacks over the head until they develop a less academic style of writing. And to have their article deleted. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 12:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, OR/POV. --Muchness 14:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The article subject is indeed a protologism, and the article contents are the personal opinions and analyses of two Wikipedia editors (possibly one and the same), being published directly in Wikipedia. The article is unverifiable and original research. See Talk:Lemnian language#Translation to see what spawned it. Ironically, the article text decries the fact that many things available on Internet (e.g. personal web pages, web logs, and Usenet postings) are not considered to be reliable sources, but doesn't actually cite any sources itself at all. Delete. Uncle G 15:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as POV from someone who sounds extremely bitter about not getting their way in an edit war and figures it's all Wikipeida's fault. Plus they can't even spell "bureaucracy" correctly. Daniel Case 19:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as unencyclopedic personal POV essay; belongs in User space, if at all. MCB 01:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. It appears to be hopelessly POV. I'm not so sure I'd vote to delete it from project space though. Stifle 16:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Neologism. I nomited ths on RfD, while it still was a redirect. —Ruud 19:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • ...an average community of memes endowed only with average intelligence... Umm, people are not memes. I'm no guru of information theory, but I know that much. --Agamemnon2 13:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Perhaps he meant "mimes". Oh, and Delete for both of the reasons cited in the nom (POV and protologism).-Colin Kimbrell 15:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I spiced it up a little but the main body is still rather boring. Ashibaka tock 07:46, 21 January 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.