Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clocktowering

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. – AB CD 23:45, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Clocktowering

Clocktowering is not a real term. Google returns 1 hit.

Unsigned nomination by Kevin Rector (talk · contributions)

Keep. This could become a common term in the future. And due to the description in the article, it proves a point. --TheSamurai 02:32, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, not notable, neologism. Megan1967 03:36, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete neologism. BTW, am I the only one who thought this had something to do with Back to the Future before clicking on it? 63.173.114.141 04:17, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, Wikipedia is not for something that could become common in the future. Encyclopedias provide existing knowledge. Mgm|^(talk) 10:10, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)
Delete as nn neologism. A redirect to clock tower would be acceptable. -- Infrogmation 11:33, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, presumably a morbid joke referring to Charles Whitman but not a real word nor a Wiktionary candidate. Dbiv 12:14, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, neologism, no evidence presented showing significant real use. It could become a common term in the future, and when it does we will want an article on it; meanwhile, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball nor a vehicle for promoting new phraseology. BTW Google now returns 2 hits--one to this VfD discussion! Dpbsmith (talk) 21:03, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep. I think I've heard this word used somewhere before.. --[[User::-)|ShortyBud]] 22:12, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Note: remark by User:69.205.24.137, who has about a dozen edits, all related to a single article currently on VfD.
- Well, how about giving us a verifiable reference? Dpbsmith (talk) 23:57, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  - Even then, an article about the word would belong in Wiktionary. Uncle G 01:36, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)
No such word. Ironically, this deletion discussion is the 1st Google Web hit (out of 2). Delete Uncle G 01:36, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)
Delete - David Gerard 09:42, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete as neologism. Radiant _* 12:56, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete neologism Dsmdgold 23:09, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
Tell the author of this article to put this in Wiktionary. --TheSamurai 23:48, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- ... where it will be deleted even more promptly than it is being deleted from here, for not being a word. Uncle G 18:38, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)

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.