Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki-zealotry
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 --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 22:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wiki-zealotry
Completing incomplete AfD nomination. Page appears to be a WP:POINT masquerading as an article. Pure OR page about a neologism with no sources. Kesh 21:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of significant coverage by secondary sources. 17Drew 21:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as neologism, unverifiable, and original research. --Farix (Talk) 21:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as a non-notable neologism. No evidence of notability offered in article, gsearch doesn't show this term in common use. --Fabrictramp 21:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete "Donating intellect" is not the first person to observe it, but I have to agree that it's a neologism that he or she hopes will catch on. I like "Wikypocrisy" myself, but I don't have the nerve to put an argument up. What's a "Wikizealot"? Well, when you go to the football game and see the banner that says "John 3:16", the Wikizealot hangs one next to it that says "WP:LIST" Mandsford 23:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- I read the above, and could only think of this: xkcd. :) -- Kesh 00:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- This cartoon should appear in the Signpost. Pavel Vozenilek 00:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- I read the above, and could only think of this: xkcd. :) -- Kesh 00:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - the fact that some people may have used it doesn't in itself make it notable. Deb 11:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Move to Wikipedia space, and label this as a essay. 'Cause that's what it is. - Smerdis of Tlön 13:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note that the article is not written as an essay, so it'd need a complete rewrite anyway. -- Kesh 18:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as per others: no evidence of notability, POV. Mdbrownmsw 18:35, 17 September 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.
