- 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 redirect. Nothing viable to merge but I assume it's a likely search term. Wizardman 16:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Rimeman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Mythological neologism - the common English term, as the article concedes, is "frost giant" - that plainly involves a good bit of original research. I suggest a Merge and redirect to Jötunn. RGTraynor 14:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge: Commenters should probably note that the article's gotten a bit messed up since the nominated version. I'd revert, but there's enough edits I don't want to stomp on any legitamate changes. But as the nominator notes, as an alternate translation to "frost giant" this should be merged into Jötunn. RGTraynor, if you want a merge, next time use the standard merge templates instead of nominating it for deletion -- this is the wrong venue for it. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply: Which I would have done if the editor looked as if he was doing a one-off edit. Failing WP:NEO, however, is a valid deletion ground. RGTraynor 17:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Strong Delete:Attempts to find reliable sources failed-RavichandarMy coffee shop 14:53, 24 May 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.