Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mindbomb

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 seems called for. W.marsh 19:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mindbomb

Mindbomb (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

This article has very little content. I believe it also is a Neologism. Thirdly, the article is only supported by one link, which is unverifiable, as the word does not even appear in the linked article. This appears to be nonsensical in nature and should be deleted. Commodorepants 03:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

  • The author appears to have updated with some more information, but the article still lacks any source documentation. Thereby, the word still appears to be a Neologism. Commodorepants 03:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • DELETE as pure nonsense. Nardman1 03:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


  • Gosh, you guys don't give much of a chance, do you? I'm in the middle of building the article, and already it's being shot to pieces! I fully intend build the article into something bigger, but there's not much point if you can delete it before I get a chance! --Blather 03:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete "Mindbomb or 'mindbomb' is a term created by Robert Hunter (journalist)" the very definition of Neologism, especially since mindbomb as one word rapes the english language.--Dacium 03:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Can someone please point me to where the rules ban Neologisms - this isn't being a smartass, I can't find the rule!--Blather 04:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • My link above was wrong but is now fixed, it is here under "Articles on neologisms" unforutently this sort of thing happens, it is nothing against you but the term doesnt deserve an article--Dacium 04:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Mind Bomb got one, and it gets its name from the original reference by Hunter... --Blather 04:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. The obituary link calls it 'mind bomb', not 'mindbomb'. The Mind Bomb album doesn't mention Hunter at all, perhaps you could include the inspiration and the concept there. Pomte 04:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • The terms "mindbomb" and "mind bomb" are interchangeable. I've found both versions in the literature. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blather (talk • contribs) 04:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Merge and redirect to Robert Hunter (journalist). Although an interesting neologism, and there are halfway decent references, it really isn't a term that has much currency (whether it had any real currency in the 1970s I don't know). It's primarily associated with Hunter, so the information can easily be treated in that article. --Dhartung | Talk 07:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete lacks sources to pass WP:NEO.-- danntm T C 02:26, 23 January 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.