Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superdon (2nd nomination)

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. Mr.Z-man 00:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superdon[edit]

A completely unsourced article about what appears to be a neologism. There was previously an article with this title which was deleted in May 2006, which appears to have been on the same topic, while this one was created June 2006. There is a suggestion that the term may appear in a book of Andrew Marr: I don't have a copy of it so can't verify this, but even if it does there is no evidence that the term is in wider use. RFBailey (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Big ole mess of WP:NEO and WP:OR. Movingboxes (talk) 05:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no sources, neologism. JIP | Talk 06:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing at dict.org. The article telegraph.co.uk mentions "Johns Hopkins University professor who graduated to Superdon status in 1992". UK's Daily Mail mentions Professor Fernandez-Armesto, once described as "the archetypal superdon". There are some mentions at books.google.com and Wikipedia's superdon article is cited at scholar.google.com. The term could be Super Don. Suntag (talk) 08:31, 30 August 2008 (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.