Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argumentum ad vox absurda

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 delete. Sango 123 (e) 04:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argumentum ad vox absurda[edit]

This page is a neologism coined by a wikipedia user, and thus contravenes the Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms part of wikipedia's No original research policy. Jgsj 01:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, but it's bad Latin grammar. Censeo paginam esse delendam -- I mean, delete. --Nlu (talk) 01:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Looks like a joke to me. Made me giggle a bit. --Hyperbole 01:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Nlu. Feezo (Talk) 01:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom unless legitimate sources are provided. dbtfz ^talk 02:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Idem censeo quam Nlu censet Bucketsofg 02:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as neologism --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 02:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NEO, WP:NOR, and WP:NOT. Royboy crashfan 03:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delendum est as bad Latin. Brian G. Crawford, the so-called "Nancy Grace of AfD" 03:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 09:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Censeo paginam esse delendam. Also, ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam per Cato the Elder, but that's just me.
- ... and this discussion merits BJAODN. Alba 13:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Carthago est bona. Censeo Vandales et vandales et creatores novorum verborum esse delendos. --Nlu (talk) 17:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, neologism. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 17:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Rerete rer rarove." Esquizombi 18:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all -M^ask 00:59, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Wasn't there a Monty Python sketch about this? Peter Grey 04:12, 26 March 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.