Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super-Sargasso Sea

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:15, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Super-Sargasso Sea

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's some mentions of this but it seems to be mostly a WP:NEOLOGISM that can never be written as more than a WP:DICTIONARY definition, which is what Wikipedia is not. Even the examples don't actually reference this, and seems to be original research. There just isn't enough third party coverage to create an article that can meet the WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wow, this is a "nice" find, it has been a while since I seen such an obvious piece of WP:FANCRUFT/OR. WP:TNT with prejudice. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete one sargasso sea in the world is enough. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 08:34, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete- a fictional Dimension whith no in depth coverage. Sv72 (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SIGCOV and WP:SNOW. Bearian (talk) 19:42, 4 August 2020 (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.