Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charmest

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. BJ^Talk 21:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charmest

neologism, not notable, no refs, etc. Falcon8765 (talk) 23:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NEO, WP:NAD. There are two different English words with the spelling "charmest". The first is the archaic second-person singular present tense of wikt:charm, where in modern English we would say "you charm", e.g. "You charm people", previously we would have used "thou charmest", e.g. "Thou charmest people". The second is a modern possibly slang, possibly south-Asian English word meaning "most charming", e.g. "Sarah is the charmest girl in school". The first sense clearly meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion, but I'm not sure about the second. Regardless, I can find no evidence that the meanings presented in this article are in use so there is no point in transwikiing. Thryduulf (talk) 00:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. —Thryduulf (talk) 00:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Almost certainly WP:NEO. In any case, WP:NAD and no possibility of any expansion except for (Heaven forbid) yet another "in popular culture" section taking up 95% of the article. --Closeapple (talk) 04:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the definition of a neologism. (Did you notice the name of the user who created the page, by the way?) Cnilep (talk) 19:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As above. No refs, WP:NEO says it all. Andy (talk) 00:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete violates WP:NEO --mhking (talk) 00:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete This is the WP:NEOest violationest everest! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:49, 15 July 2009 (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.