Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Affinity Social Network Community

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 speedy delete. Bellepark (talk · contribs) keeps describing it as a neologism but refuses to accept that we don't do neologisms. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:21, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Affinity Social Network Community (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:Neologism, no Google hits, notability not established. Seems to be original research. —Largo Plazo (talk) 04:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. —Largo Plazo (talk) 04:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —Largo Plazo (talk) 04:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per G3; tagged as such. A whopping eight Ghits, all of them Wikipedia. Erpert ^{WHAT DO YOU WANT???} 08:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was going to give the creator the benefit of the doubt because s/he is a new editor and thus might not understand what Wikipedia is all about, but judging from his/her talk page, it seems more like a case of WP:IDHT. Erpert ^{WHAT DO YOU WANT???} 08:35, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete, either per WP:CSD#G3 or WP:CSD#A7. There's absolutely nothing on Google that is related to the subject. Even if it does exist, perhaps it is, at present, a planned group. hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 08:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redacting A7 arguments as the subject is not an organisation. I have, however, investigated the sources posted there and virtually none of them mentioned the term in question. hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 08:55, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.