- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 700 Clicks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I declined the speedy for this as it was tagged with A1 and the article does have context. I don't, however, think that this term is particularly noteworthy as far as memes go. I can see where it's somewhat used, but it looks to be more of a WP:NEOLOGISM than a meme that would merit its own article at this time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete Not sure why an A1 was placed on this, that was obviously wrong. I PRODed the article because it's one of the CSD loopholes: Not a recognized neologism, no notability. The author's insistence of calling it a "meme" is just icing on the cake. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 16:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete - do we really need a debate for this? Dejakh~talk!•did! 19:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete under G3 Couldn't find anything to substantiate it. Mkdwtalk 04:54, 2 April 2013 (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.