Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squeegified

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 14:18, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Squeegified

Nonsense, though not quite sufficiently patent for speedying. --Weyes 20:31, 2005 May 2 (UTC)

I find it to be a fun word that i myself will start to use, so i say don't delete it-chris 5/2/05

i say leave it here,This is the best word i have ever heard in my entire life, i cant stop laughing-Brandon 5/2/05

Speedy delete, notwithstanding the glowing testimonials above. No meaningful content or links. Clearly irrelevant and non-encyclopedic. Onlyemarie 20:41, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, although the article is absolutely hilarious.Sensation002 20:44, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Absolutely patent nonsense fully worthy of a speedy delete. Quale 20:58, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Patent nonsense, and expanding it does not make it less so. -- The Anome 21:16, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Don't delete this.

i think it's funny,so my vote is keep it:Nick

i love it, keep it:Frank

Some words defy common thinking and daily conversation, but challenge the sharper minds when looking for a different way to say things. This is worth keeping: Frenchie

Note the multiple revisions by 151.196.33.34 - snooooooooze. Onlyemarie 21:22, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obscure dictionary definition. Mgm|^(talk) 21:57, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

hello i'm the person w/ that ip adress and i would like to say that i'm chris and my friend nick who is over at my house said he wanted to vote, my father then came home from work told us to get off the pc and before we left the room we got him to read the post and he said he would like to make a comment and he signed under the name Frenchie.

Another comment by 151.196.33.34
Delete. Nonsense and obscure. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:44, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable, neologism. Megan1967 02:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. Zscout370 (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is an awesome word that will catch on-jack

you must be squeegified to want to get rid of the word-matt

sweet word,i like it so my votes a no on deletion-dan

The above comment was made by IP User:208.198.210.3

so you know those are separte people from a school's public sever therefor they all have the same ip address attached.

Ok, you have the same IP address. But in Wikipedia, it is one user, one vote. And truely, other than people from your school voting for "keep" of the article, no one else has came over and voted to keep. I would not be surprised if an admin will discount the Annon. votes. If you do not want this situation to happen again, why not just create an account so this mess will not be happening. Plus, the main reason why most people want the article to be gone is that Wikipedia is not primarily used as a dictionary. That is where Wikitonary comes into play. It is also the meere fact that only a small group of people use this word and we are not a collection site of slang terms. Try the urban dictionary, or your wesbite to spread this term, not Wikipedia. Zscout370 (talk) 20:51, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Del nn neolog dicdef —msh210 19:36, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

im the person that made this site and just so you all know how does a word start other than by someone taking the initiative to put it somewhere that people see it, and you said that wikipedia is NOT a dictionary so this means it should accept all terms that have meaning or sentimental value to people Comment by 141.157.76.84

I said earlier that you should put the term on YOUR personal website or YOUR blog, not Wikipedia. Though if you want to take the effort to make a word popular, more power to you, but Wikipedia is not the place to do it. Plus, this word does not have much meaning to many people, other than your schoolmates. That, to us, is not notable. If the term is used by half of the United States, we might think about it, but it is not. We got rid of terms before that were created, just like Squeegified, and we got rid of terms that appear in placed like the Urban Dictionary. I want you and your friends to read this to see where me and the others are coming from. Zscout370 (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

okay, i get where your coming from, but I would like to say that this word is not one that is only used by one kind of group, also that this is not a slang word because it isn't a shorter version of a word that we are to lazy to sound out. This is a word made up be people for people, which is how most words start and i therefore think it should be allowed to stay.

If you want to vote keep, that is fine with me. But I am just explaining on why myself and others do not want the word to be in Wikipedia. As for you claiming that the word is wide-spread, I have two words for you: prove it. Show us links, show us a Google search, show us stuff. Plus, since it is a made-up word, people might have some issue with that. As I said before, if the page here is whacked, then why not just start a website or a blog and then use the word there. It will still not be on Wikipedia, but I do not mind if you use the other methods to spread this word. I do not know if it will catch on. BTW, I want to clariify some of the votes people casted:

NN=Not Notable. Usually, this means that this person/place/thing/word/event/etc. is not really important to the world at large. Though the above things might be meaningful to some people, to most the world, they do not care.
Negoloism=That word is defined as a word that is just mainly in local use. This word qualifies at that, since it is only used by you and your pals.
DicDef=Dictionary Defintion. As I mentioned above, we have a project that deals with just dictionary terms, so articles that are usually just terms are frowned upon.

I know you want to keep the page, which I have no problems with, but I just think that this article will be deleted. Zscout370 (talk) 21:35, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

do you want me to put the names that go with the comments that have no names? also when we said widespread we were referring to our area.

Sure, but I am not sure it will affect the voting or not. As for the widespread factor, I am not sure what the benchmark is, but I think that just your school/region might not be good enough. Zscout370 (talk) 21:56, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as neologism (or "protologism", if you prefer). --Angr/_comhrá 02:40, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Neologism compounded with inappropriate bluster (NPOV) and falsified etymology. Dystopos 03:18, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you tell me to prove it but seeing as how you can type anything into google and find a naughty pic, i dont think that is the best search engine to use, and now it hasent gone international, but it could make it there with a friendly page helping it and then you all can say you supported the starting of this word

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.