Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Designated Ugly Fat Friend

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. The Miami Herald does it again — quality journalism since 1903! El_C 20:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Designated Ugly Fat Friend (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Neologism, long article with lots of unsourced assertions, only cited source is a blog. NawlinWiki 12:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete useless cruft. -Nard 12:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While this term does seem to be in somewhat common use [1], it fails WP:NEO. The only thing close to a reliable source I can find is a mention in an advice column in the Miami Herald [2]. Darksun 12:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Tom Harrison ^Talk 12:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non-notable term, and I am even more critical of the sources provided; a mention in a brief advice column entry, and a blog, do not reliable resources make. ◄Zahakiel► 14:21, 31 July 2007 (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.