- 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-27 06:01Z
Dicdef, unreferenced - probably a neologism. Awyong J. M. Salleh 01:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Seems like a neologism that multiple people could come up with independently, but still not promising as an encyclopedia article. FreplySpang 01:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect, No merge to Fud, Elmer Fudd is disambiguated there, and this could be an easy mispelling of FUD as well. Also would prevent the article from being casually re-created. —siroχo 01:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect per Siroxo
- Delete Not even werth redirecting.--Dacium 04:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect Fudd (lowercase) to Elmer Fudd. The existing FUDD article contains no notable, verifiable information. - Richardcavell 04:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete--Sefringle 06:39, 24 February 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.