Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bomb-site

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. D e ath phoenix 06:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bomb-site[edit]

This looks like a dictdef. This claim is strengthened by the fact that Wiktionary has an entry for bomb site. I gave this article a chance with the {{expert}} tag but it is still a dictdef. And I'm not sure it is a very accurate one at that. James084 21:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

del dicdef, and incorrect, too. mikka (t) 22:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. with some article on expression or british slang. or else delete. A bomb site is exactly what we would imagine it is, and isn't really a "real" thing. It's totally figurative in this article. it doesn't need explaining. I would say merge or delete.--Esprit15d 22:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary. Monkeyman^(talk) 22:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Monkeyman. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 10:52, 22 February 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.