Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xettonym

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xettonym

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

This is merely a dictionary definition with no hope of becoming a genuine article. Contested prod. MER-C 10:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Actually it is a stub encyclopaedia article about xettonyms. That an article is short does not make it a dictionary article. The real problem with this article is that it is original research. I can find nothing at all that documents the concept of xettonyms. This is a novel concept being first named and documented directly in Wikipedia, with no documentation already existing outside of Wikipedia. Uncle G 11:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, until xettonym becomes a notable xettonym. --Tikiwont 12:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. No sources, no notability. Realkyhick 22:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Transwiki as a dicdef. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 03:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It has already been transwikied [1] and is proposed for deletion there as well.--Tikiwont 08:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Like Uncle G, I could find nothing to substantiate this term. It appears to be OR, a neologism/protologism or a hoax. In any event, it should be deleted.--Kubigula (talk) 04:56, 2 April 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.