Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TROFL
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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] TROFL
Cannot possibly be attributed to a Reliable Source J293339 (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —J293339 (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Neutral Whatever was there is gone now and is now a redirect to a Wiktionairy page. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 18:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete last version that had any content is clearly a neologism that hasn't caught on. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TROFL&oldid=122462003 Initial version makes it look like it was something someone made up one day. -- Mark Chovain 13:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Soft redirect equivalent of a R1 Speedy, except R1 does not apply to soft redirects. Nothing about the term is present at the Wiktionary target, so no real point in maintaining this soft redirect over to there. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Said acronym can not be found in the given Wiktionary page. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 02:14, 12 June 2008 (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.
