Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KIBO

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 redirect to Kibo. Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 05:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KIBO[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lacks references in reliable 3rd party sources, no indication that this article might ever be expanded beyond a dictionary entry RadioFan (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: an entry of The new hacker's dictionary (Eric S. Raymond), this term is in the print version. There are other print references containing this term riffic (talk) 10:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is also a music album by this name (expanded form) according to freebase. --MelanieN (talk) 16:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

Comment looks like just a single album by this artist though I'm not finding it mentioned anywhere else. This looks to have similar trouble meeting notability guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 04:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No evidence of notability at all and no RS. NBeale (talk) 23:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment nom updated with additional link to ~~WP:NOTDIR~~WP:NOTDICTIONARY

Did you mean "dictionary" or "directory"? JIP | Talk 06:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it would be preferable to transwiki to wiktionary then. riffic (talk) 10:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you are right, WP:NOTDICTIONARY, copy to Wikitionary seems appropriate. Does it meet guidelines there?--RadioFan (talk) 12:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article does claim to be sourced from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing. Don't know what that is or its reliability. --Pink Bull 23:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee // have a cup // ark // 21:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki and delete. No evidence of expandability per nom Polarpanda (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kibo, since it's just an alternative capitalization of that term, which is already a disambiguation page. If the term meets Wiktionary's criteria, then no objection to the transwiki. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 21:59, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, then redirect to Kibo. this page has nothing worth saving. all case variations should redirect to one dab page. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Redirect to Kibo and categorize the redirect as "Redirects from alternative capitalizations". A transwiki should be fine as well. Airplaneman ^talk 02:36, 21 December 2009 (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.