Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blogosphere

Past VFD archived here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blogosphere2

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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 00:02, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

blogosphere

Keep I'm ignorant and came across this term only recently. I didn't know what it this was 'til i looked it up on wikipedia. So useful to all us trolls out there. --moreanon 20:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable, should be merged with blog at the very least. Skrewler 03:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep without merging, neologism in wide circulation. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:07, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary. Widely used term. Grutness...wha? 05:37, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. 17.7 million Google results for blogosphere see [1] and this is a well-referenced explanation of the concept. Capitalistroadster 08:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or at least transwiki --Swamp Ig
Keep. Past AfD nomination should've given you a hint. --Andylkl ^(talk) 10:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously notable neologism. I want a button on my keyboard that violently murders people who actually use this word, though. - Randwicked 10:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a widely used and understood phenomenon. Jtmichcock 12:37, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Quickly moving beyond neologism. Dottore So 12:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or transwiki. Depressingly—very depressingly—this neologism is here to stay. Please vigorously fustigate me if you ever catch me using the word non-sarcastically. —HorsePunchKid→龜 20:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Widely used term, so deletion rationale "Not notable" is wrong. Survived AfD before if I'm not mistaken. Punkmorten 21:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Because a few dozen people participate in mental masturbation on the subject, doesn't mean everyone else has to. --Timecop 01:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep in use in mainstream media. Jessamyn 02:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, even if this is the stupidest neologism since "metrosexual." Andrew Levine 04:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There seems to be an attack on blogosphere entries at Wikipedia. There's also a vfd on the Canadian Blogosphere--Simon.Pole 04:46, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Quantity is not quality nor notability. 65.34.232.136 05:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this one, as it describes a notable phenomenon. I would say we should merge all articles on national blogospheres into it (including Canadian blogosphere and Belgian Blogosphere) if they had anything worth merging, but they don't. — Haeleth Talk 17:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. -- Femmina 22:38, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable term. --J. Nguyen 00:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some might not like the term, but it doesn't change that it's in use and people want to understand it.
Delete. Crappy term to denote a series of shit pages of worthless garbage. --86.2.56.178 12:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep since it's a widely used term. Do not transwiki to Wiktionary since the article goes beyond being a simple definition of a word. Angela . 12:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's places for stuff like this. --Depakote 12:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Only going to get more important. Carina22 12:57, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep this term is heavily used actualy. --Mateusc 13:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Blog. Reyk 01:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep used heavily by news outlets. Jacqui ^? 01:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Stirling Newberry 03:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Organized deletion vandalism merits banning. --FOo 05:16, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Blog. There doesn't seem to be enough here to merit a separate article. Slartoff 02:55, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Tend to agree with foo. Rhobite 03:28, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep word with widespread mainstream currency and considerable potential for encyclopedic explanation. - squibix 18:33, 19 November 2005 (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.