Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stumpgrinder

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 of the debate was DELETE JDoorj a m Talk 20:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stumpgrinder

Non-notable neologism Naconkantari e|t||c|m 21:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. --BorgQueen 21:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh. Delete hastily as a neologism. On the talk page, the author of the page declares they want to be "ahead of the curve" or some such nonsense and get the article up before the term is popular. WP:ISNOT a derogatory-slang crystal ball. JDoorj a m Talk 21:36, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, no! You're doing it all wrong! First the term gets famous, then you get a Wikipedia article! Delete at any velocity per JDoorjam, and recreate as redirect to Stump grinder. -- Saberwyn 21:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as patent nonsense. Doesn't this qualify as hate speech or fighting words? Brian G. Crawford 21:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- CSD A7 (attack page) may be what you're looking for. -- Saberwyn 21:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If consensus, which seems inevitable, is reached for deletion, do so on the original grounds of non-notable (which is yet to be seen) neologism; With regards to the idea of hate speech or attack page, the entry is clearly neither, as the base reference is qualified and cultural influence is explained, and the allegations themselves are inflammatory. You may find the page ridiculous, which is your prerogative, but those implications surpass it. The page disparages no particular being, item or other entity. ToxinX
Delete per WP:NEO and WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of garbage. --Kinu ^t/_c 22:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Bucketsofg 22:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect as per Saberwyn.--M @r ē ino 22:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as either attack or nonsense. Sandstein 05:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.