Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skanch
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 (non-admin closure), WP:NADWP:Snow. Wiki11790 talk 22:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Skanch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary or guide to slang and is not for things made up one day; this is an unsupported neologism and there is no indication that it is notable. PROD removed by author without comment. JohnCD (talk) 14:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete with fire. I'm sure I could throw acronyms at this all day long, but JohnCD hits the nail(s) on the head(s) extremely well above. OBM | blah blah blah 14:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete. Wiki is not a dictionary. Shovon (talk) 16:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete. Not a dic, not notable, will not become acceptable in the future.Russian Textiles (talk) 16:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete with a side of warn. WP:NAD doesn't even begin to cover this sitation…a word has to be real to get into the dictionary. :) Livitup (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete besides WP:NAD, article doesn't assert notability or importance. Grey Wanderer (talk) 19:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete Per WP:DICDEF and WP:MADEUP. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete per nom ukexpat (talk) 21:36, 26 June 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.