Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marx-Muhammad Pact
- 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 keep. John254 00:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Marx-Muhammad_Pact (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)
Neologism no legit sources --Gary123 (talk) 14:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but move Notable neologism in the conservative media and blogosphere. Examples of usage of the term and its variants in notable sources: Global Politician [1], Free Republic [www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1819044/posts], The American Thinker [2], Amir Taheri (Jerusalem Post/FrontPage Magazine) [3], Jihad Watch [4], Daniel Pipes [5], William S. Lind [6], Tom G. Palmer [7], Fjordman [8]. There's nothing that says Wikipedia cannot contain political neologisms, just take a look at Category:Political neologisms for many examples. However it seems that the term "Leftist-Islamist Alliance" is more popular so perhaps the article should be moved there. /Slarre (talk) 14:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but move - per Slarre. - BillCJ (talk) 10:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- keep as legit reflection of the real, if imaginary, world. What is this 'move language' about? Hmains (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2008 (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.