Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyperfur

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 Delete Redirect optional. ~ trialsanderrors 03:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperfur[edit]

Of the 80-odd unique Google hits off Wikipedia, none appear to eb reliable sources and many are unrelated. This seems to be a neologism with strictly limited currency. Guy 00:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to macrophilia, if anywhere. The definition is accurate enough, but it's not a particularly significant term even within the furry fandom, and I don't believe there is a good source for it. GreenReaper 01:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sources, if sources are presented, should be Merged into main article.scope_creep 01:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Doug Winger. I don't know if he technically started it or not, but it's certainly most commonly associated with him. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to macrophilia. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 02:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to macrophilia Robovski 02:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Frivolous. --Duke of Duchess Street 02:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Dicdef neologism. I don't even see the term relevant to the furry fandom. Wikifur doesn't even use that term, but calls it "Hypertrophilia" or "Hyper-endowed". Anomo 03:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, furrycruft AND a neologism! Lankiveil 00:40, 11 November 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.