Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skyscraper Square

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. --- Deville (Talk) 00:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of this term being used for that place can be found on the web - seems to be a neologism. H005 23:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. If there is any content worth keeping, merge it into City of London. --Metropolitan90 02:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete its plausible that such a term might come into existence, but I've yet to hear of it and can't find any other reference to it. In London, Canary Wharf would still have a better claim to be skyscraper square at the moment, and several other skyscrapers are proposed and under construction in a number of locations around London so I doubt this term would last even if it were true. -- Solipsist 09:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Neologism as per nom (I've worked here and never heard it called that). Catchpole 18:15, 7 September 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.