Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tops

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. - Mailer Diablo 00:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tops[edit]

Usage coined by some friends from the Isle of Wight. Delete as non notable slang --JJay 00:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --JJay 00:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as neologism and not verifiable under WP:V. Capitalistroadster 01:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please note Top (disambiguation), TOPS, and our Wikipedia:naming conventions (plurals). Uncle G 01:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unverifiable neologism. Double whammy. --W.marsh 02:48, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. TDS ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I should add that in Australia tops means the best. For example, an article in todays Canberra Times says "Telco access tops: report" with a sub headline Canberra best placed for services. This usage is opposite to the usage claimed in this article. Capitalistroadster 03:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps ~~merge~~ to wiktionary. I am not sure of their policy on UK slang, but I know this is used to some extent in that way.Davidrowe 05:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Most dictionaries take slang words, and Wiktionary is no exception. The requirement is that the word and meaning be attested. Uncle G 12:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - change my vote from maybe merge to delete-Davidrowe 04:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As per nomination.--Alicejenny 08:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 13:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Rewrite~~, "tops" is actual British slang for "at most". Such as "You can usually get it for a pound. A pound and a half, tops." The usage in the article, though, is a non-notable neologism. — JIP | Talk 14:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is not a dictionary of slang, though. What you've just described belongs in tops (and, indeed, is already there). Uncle G 19:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that case, I change my vote to delete. — JIP | Talk 13:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after copying to BJAODN. --TantalumTelluride 05:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. -Haon 02:28, 14 November 2005 (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.