Content deleted Content added
PocklingtonDan (talk | contribs) |
→[[Apronym]]: Delete |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
*'''Delete''' obviously [[User:JuJube|JuJube]] 07:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' obviously [[User:JuJube|JuJube]] 07:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - the pheonomenon is real, interesting, and notable. If it should be moved to another name, then so be it, but the phenomenon should be noted in an article somewhere, whatever its name - <span style="color:#ccf;background:#ccf;border-style: single">[[User:PocklingtonDan|PocklingtonDan]]</span> 09:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - the pheonomenon is real, interesting, and notable. If it should be moved to another name, then so be it, but the phenomenon should be noted in an article somewhere, whatever its name - <span style="color:#ccf;background:#ccf;border-style: single">[[User:PocklingtonDan|PocklingtonDan]]</span> 09:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
||
* '''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Firefoxman|FirefoxMan]] 17:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:43, 11 January 2007
Apronym
Neologism Wizardman 01:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. The word does not appear in dictionaries, but the phenomenon of apronyms is notable, and it should use that name until a better name is found. (By the same criteria, RAS syndrome is also a neologism. It's a good comparison bec. both articles are about unusual acronyms.) YechielMan 05:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. When the origin of a term is a form whose name includes the term, there is really very little question that the term is a neologism or protologism. That issue entirely aside, the article does not meet inclusion standards on the merits. There is no means to determine if an acronym is sufficiently "appropriate" to be considered. Because no third-party sources address this term, the topic inescapably fails WP:OR. Serpent's Choice 06:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Delete obviously JuJube 07:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - the pheonomenon is real, interesting, and notable. If it should be moved to another name, then so be it, but the phenomenon should be noted in an article somewhere, whatever its name - PocklingtonDan 09:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. FirefoxMan 17:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)