- 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. —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-26 15:06Z
Contested prod. Concern: "nn neologism, 33 ghits". Article's author notes on talk page that she coined the term: "This is a term that existed nowhere until I started using it to fill a gap in expression regarding new musical forms." Delete per WP:NOT#OR/WP:NEO. Muchness 14:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete blogger neologism. I noticed on the talk page: "I have verified this by phone with Oxford Dictionary's publisher who quoted that for a fee I can have it entered as Neologism with my name attached in the next dictionary edition" — if true, this is something to be taken into account in future AfDs. Demiurge 14:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. As for the dictionary business, I would say that if what the editor is speaking of is the Oxford English Dictionary, the tale sounds, to be kind, implausible. On the other hand, just as there are countless fee-based directories along the lines of Who's Who, I suppose it's not impossible that there's a vanity dictionary, too. Robertissimo 14:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. It would be nice if the people who prod pages would explain why to the author, especially with new contributors. This is the second time the page was prodded, the first time it was deleted. The author's comment when removing the prod "I removed this as there is nothing wrong with a neologism, I thought this was a progessive site? You only need google the word to see what I have said is true!" shows that they didn't understand why the prod was placed on their page. ~ BigrTex 16:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete protologism. Danny Lilithborne 17:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as prodder per above. MER-C 01:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Admitted neologism. —ShadowHalo 03:35, 22 December 2006 (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.