Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patch (emo)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Jonesey95 (talk | contribs) at 19:03, 11 December 2023 (Fix Linter errors. More needed. Leaving font tags for bots.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 19:03, 11 December 2023 by Jonesey95 (talk | contribs) (Fix Linter errors. More needed. Leaving font tags for bots.)
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. --Coredesat 04:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete belatedly contested prod, restored to bring it here. No sources, little context, not notable. Carlossuarez46 21:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-notable teenage slang. Urban Dictionary doesn't count as a source. Thomjakobsen 22:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:NOT a dictionary. Hal peridol 22:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Wikipedia is not for something that some kids with bad haircuts made up in school one day. OfficeGirl 22:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per nom. And what on earth is an emo! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nothing more than an unsourced neo dict entry. Could just as easily go in Emo (slang). Mark Chovain 00:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 00:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, not notable, WP:NOT a dictionary. — mark ✎ 07:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - NN and OR. Do we really have to pander to every "I wanna kill myself" thought of these Elmo things? I mean emo things? ;) I'm not even sure the main article of Emo hair is notable, let alone its offspring... Do we really need an article for a tuft of hair belonging to a teenage fad? Spawn Man 10:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Original research. Dean Wormer 04:49, 9 September 2007 (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.