Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eating a grounder

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 delete. Sr13 is almost Singularity 08:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eating a grounder

Eating a grounder (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable (and absolutely vile) sexual slang. Google yields five hits, two from Urban Dictionary, two from Answers.com, and one from what I think is a gay porn site. I'm afraid to open it and find out, but that doesn't change that this doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Consequentially 04:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete and salt WP:NEO And I know Wikipedia is uncensored but please get this out of here ASAP, it is disgusting, in fact I think I would classify this as Vandalism and tag it for Speedy. Gorkymalorki 06:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete And I don't care if it's sourced or not, neither do I want to read the article. Nick mallory 07:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Due to a probable hoax. Also, no one is forcing people to read the article, and Wikipedia IS uncensored. Jmlk17 07:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
True but I can't see 'eating a grounder' doing much for Wikipedia's reputation. Nick mallory 10:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. -- Talk 07:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete For obvious reasons I will not go Googling from work on the off-chance of finding a source which the nominator missed, but there's no real need as the article contains no assertion that this neologism is notable. Iain99 11:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment What employer allows employees to spend their time at work editing Wikipedia? Edison 17:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment. An awesome one. Consequentially 17:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Reply Erm, I was just looking up something work-related and must have clicked on "edit" by accident. Honest. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it, OK. Iain99 18:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Dump it per nom. WP:NEO and no WP:RS. --Evb-wiki 12:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Flush it per nom. Remind me never to eat again while editing Wikipedia. --Targeman 14:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The definition on Urban Dictionary is word for word identical to this one, and was added after this article was created. Can't see any other independent sources.--Belovedfreak 15:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Being grossed out is not a valid deletion argument. See also Coprophilia and Coprophagia. But this is an unsourced neologism, so it can be promptly and speedily deleted on that basis. Edison 17:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Reply. My argument was primarily the non-notability. When I said "I'm afraid to open it," I was referring to the gay porn site, not the article. Nomination for deletion without reading it? Pft. Consequentially 17:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I've always found electric kettles pretty hot... --Targeman 16:59, 7 August 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.