Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All wet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All wet[edit]
- All wet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable slang word. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 07:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm. Would it fit in Wiktionary? humblefool® 19:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Just a dictionary definition of a phrase, which is already listed in Wiktionary anyway. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Absolutely, it's purely a dictionary definition and in Wiktionary already. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:25, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per nominator. 11coolguy12 (talk) 09:41, 3 October 2011 (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.