Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weepul
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The result was nomination withdrawn. — Scientizzle 18:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weepul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)– (View log)- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I figure AfD is a better place to hash out these claims. — Scientizzle 21:07, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]Not a word is true, it was a marketing tool in the Netherlands, but not since the eighties, only since 2004 or 2005. It may have been invented long before, but since the lying begins in the first line by inventing an English word for it, I presume the whole article is marketing-nonsense. Wuppie is not an acronym for anything, is it just a funny name. This article seems to be created to give some fundament to a Dutch marketing-campain. Vier Tildes (talk) 20:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 21:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 21:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The article creator certainly didn't make up the English name for this[1] and the Google News archive results linked above go back to the early 1980s, so the accusations of lying in the nomination don't hold water. I'm not yet sure about notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right, I'm wrong. Seeing this mixture of fact and fiction, and the promotional intend, I did not look close enough. I still think this article needs some revieuw, but there may be no need to delete it. As far as I'm concerned, the deletion-tag can be removed. Sorry to have disturbed you. Regards, Vier Tildes (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, I'll close the AfD. — Scientizzle 18:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right, I'm wrong. Seeing this mixture of fact and fiction, and the promotional intend, I did not look close enough. I still think this article needs some revieuw, but there may be no need to delete it. As far as I'm concerned, the deletion-tag can be removed. Sorry to have disturbed you. Regards, Vier Tildes (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2010 (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.