- 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. Mgm|(talk) 11:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Pssh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Contested prod. In short, I don't think it meets the notability guideline. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 03:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - This is nothing but a poor attempt at a dictionary definition, has no sources, and contradicts itself. Move along. Nothing to see here. Reyk YO! 03:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no sources, never heard of it. --T*85 (talk) 04:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Reyk, its a dictionary definition with some made up nonsense tacked on. Icewedge (talk) 07:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - dictionary definition, and of no value to an encyclopedia. - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:47, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Dicdef, not encyclopaedic. — neuro(talk) 09:32, 22 November 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.