- 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. The term is not mentioned in World of Warcraft, so redirecting there is counterproductive. – sgeureka t•c 14:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Raidroll (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Unremarkable neologism Oscarthecat (talk) 21:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect and mention in World of Warcraft - Seems like a plausible search term to me. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 05:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 17:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, unremarkable neologism. Term is so uncommon that it isn't even mentioned in wowwiki. MLauba (talk) 18:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as a non-notable dictionary entry and game guide content. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 19:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect because it's cheap and does no harm here. 9Nak (talk) 17:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP isn't a dictionary of obscure gaming slang, if WoWWiki doesn't need it we certainly don't. Someoneanother 12:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:DICTDEF && WP:NEO. G'day, Jack Merridew 12:37, 8 April 2009 (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.