Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snoodling
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 Speedy Delete under WP:CSD#G3 as obvious hoax/vandalism. — Satori Son 13:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Snoodling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable neologism. Nick—Contact/Contribs 04:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete Not only is Wikipedia not a dictionary, it isn't Urban Dictionary either. KJS77 Join the Revolution 04:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral. Has potential regardless of the intentions of the authro. Bilodeauzx (talk) 05:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Cunard (talk) 05:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete looks like an urbandictionary addition. --Banime (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Sorry, but UrbanDictionary is that-a-way. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 17:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is the work of a serial hoaxer with at least two sockpuppets. See my comments and proof at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mwynyw. Could an admin take action, please? Enaidmawr (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comment. I did not write this article, nor have I ever hoaxed cereals. Thank you. Bilodeauzx (talk) 02:14, 23 September 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.