Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/`gina-dance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 The Wack Pack. Ryanjunk 17:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] `gina-dance
This is a neologism based on a limited event at best. - Tiswas(t/c) 19:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: Non-notable. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 20:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete, almost sounds like something somebody made up. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)- Vote changed to Merge and Redirect to Wack Pack, per JavaTenor. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 16:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete
and I'd appreciate if anyone can corroborate the related information in this edit, which smells of hoax to me.Actually, this does appear to be a portion of Stern show "lore", based on some Googling. Still no need for an individual article on it, though. JavaTenor 02:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)- In which case, a merge to Howard Stern would be not inappropriate. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- If we decide to merge or redirect, the correct target would be Wack Pack, IMO. JavaTenor 02:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Not at all opposed myself. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 16:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- It already appears in Wack Pack - Tiswas(t/c) 16:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Feh, just a straight redirect will do then. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 05:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- If we decide to merge or redirect, the correct target would be Wack Pack, IMO. JavaTenor 02:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- In which case, a merge to Howard Stern would be not inappropriate. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Retain: Seicer (talk) (contribs)
- Care to explain your !vote? It won't be taken into consideration without one. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
