Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frarority

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) 00:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frarority

An unnotable WP:NEOLOGISM. It "has not established widespread use in established media to describe coeducational fraternal and cooperative living groups and organizations" Tavix (talk) 23:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a non-notable WP:NEO due to lack of significant worldwide usage as a term as well as zero gNews hits. The 1st hit also comes up as an UrbanDictionary entry, which is never a good sign. MuZemike (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep or~~ Merge I added the one source. There seemed to be other evidence of its usage. I think a merge somewhere would be reasonable, but a deletion would be unfortunate. It's not just a word, but also part of cultural change. Fraternities are historic institutions that have been very controversial. How to, and whether to, integrate social instutions will continue to be an issue. This term reflects that and there's some substance and sourcing to be had to reflect that. Again, it's not STRONG, but I think it's worth including at least as part of a merger to Fraternity or somewhere else. It's possible that someone would look up this term and want to know what it's about. That's what an encyclopedia is all about. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed a web search and a google news search [1] indicates the term is fairly well established and has a significant cultural and historical meaning that goes beyond a dicdef. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as neologism and original research. The only reference provided is a college publication, which cannot be considered significant enough for inclusion. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 17:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-"Frarority" is merely a colloquial term for a Co-ed professional or service fraternity and it is covered well in both of those articles.Joeycfc (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article actually provides reasoning for me claiming the word has not established widespread use in established media. That was an easy one. ^Law_shoot! 01:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Simply a neologism. Malinaccier (talk) 03:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was going to found something like this when I was in college, but I was going to call it "saturnity." Nice, huh? This "frarority" is at best a neologism, and needs no article in WP. Drmies (talk) 04:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Non notable neologism VX!^~~~ 20:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete - non-notable neologism. article itself seems to assert non-notability. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:05, 24 December 2008 (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.