- 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 of the debate was hunt down the creators of the article and wipe them from the face of the planet (and, while we're at it, delete the article). DS 21:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
just read it Bottesini 22:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep No valid deletion criteria presented by nominator --Ryan Delaney talk 22:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for no reason. bogdan 22:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. "Just read it" is pretty valid, because once you do, you'll see it's made up in school one day or something to that effect. "5 points for 3rd base or a 'ben jones'"... huh? Not verifiable. --Kinu t/c 23:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nonsense. --Rob 23:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as something made up in school one day. Yes, sex is as old as time itself, but neologisms for it... well, they just aren't notable. --Elkman - (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete patent nonsense made up at school. Bucketsofg 23:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete per all the above. If we had a "delete with extreme prejudice" option, now would be the time... Gwernol 00:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- Tactical Nuke unless verifiable information can be presented from reliable, third-party sources, which I think will be unlikely anytime in the immediate future. I remember making up something like this when I was in high school, but it became unheard of after about a month. -- Saberwyn 02:53, 15 April 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.