- 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. v/r - TP 03:43, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Oizea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD. My reason for PROD tagging was: Non-notable neologism. No sources found for notability of term. The concept is covered in existing articles including Leet; the phenomenon of substituting letters with numbers is much older than Carino's book. bonadea contributions talk 15:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There is only one hit for "Oizea code" in Google books, and it's an OCR error for veuf (French for widow). A search for "Oizea" alone returns about 280 hits, but again they all appear to be OCR errors. As bonadea suggests, substitution codes of this type are common, and Leet-speak is better covered elsewhere. Cnilep (talk) 00:39, 2 April 2012 (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.