Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Floom

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. Maybe BJAODN material...Maybe not. Mailer Diablo 00:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Floom[edit]

Blatant Neologism ~ Booyabazooka 09:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, forced internet meme's never work anyways... -- Ned Scott 10:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. JPD (talk) 10:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, yes, neologisms are the suck. Proto||type 10:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, complete internet tosh. Isn't even in Urban Dictionary.Hynca-Hooley 12:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "To repeatedly scream floom with a minimum of 5 screamings and a maximum of 67". Yeah, right. JIP | Talk 12:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, protoologism which will surely never catch on. -- Mithent 16:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks like the work of some bored college students. (which it most likely is) --Krashlandon (e) 21:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for two reasons: the obvious WP:NFT, and also the fact that nowhere in the article does it actually say what it means. Very close to patent nonsense. Haikupoet 03:58, 2 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.