Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pornado

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pornado

Contested ProD. NN Neologism. Wikipedia is not: a dictionary, a how-to guide. -- IslaySolomon | talk 21:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete - What is that? definitley not an encylopedia article. Maybye a term you find on one of those slang sex term lists that gets forwarded in email but I doubt even that. Chris Kreider 21:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Incidentally, the advice given in the webpage is hilarious. I don't think there are any porn sites without spyware. Danny Lilithborne 22:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Dont get me wrong, i laughed really hard when i saw it. I think most people know EXACTLY what it is describing, just not wikipedia materialChris Kreider 23:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, I have no idea what this article is referring to ;) --Steve 23:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Apparently not yet to be an article, a very low web relevance, e.g. on Google. Though exists in Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pornado), so may be moved to Wiktionary:) --Brand спойт 23:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Neologism, original research, take your pick. AT BEST this could be transwikied to wiktionary. But I doubt it --Jayron32 06:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
    • There are nowhere near enough occurrences in running text to satisfy the attestation criteria. Uncle G 14:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:PORN. Anomo 09:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable neologism, material already covered at Pop-up ad, unreferenced/original research, factually inaccurate (your computer is "rendered useless for weeks"), written like a how-to guide, inappropriate person/tone, etc. Khatru2 03:02, 30 October 2006 (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.