Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Rat Look (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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. — Scientizzle 14:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- The Rat Look (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Prior AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Rat Look
This is still a neologism lacking in references. No mainstream media are using the term "the rat look" to refer to cars or bikes. The articles Rat bike and Rat rod are barely clinging to existence on Wikipedia, and The Rat Look is just a meta-article that tries to synthesize the two into a larger concept base on zero reliable sources. And by that I mean "Wikipedia is not for things made up one day." Better to add meat to the other two articles than to spawn more ephemeral articles. --Dbratland (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Definitely. No sourcing beyond what's there now lends little confidence. The google search is obviously confounded. I'm not seeing much to loose or reasons to not delete it. Shadowjams (talk) 09:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The only reference is from rat-look.com, and unless the neologism is mentioned elsewhere, it is probably not notable. Also, the article is an orphan, as the only article pages that link there are redirects (see here). --Brandon5485 20:18, 9 May 2010 (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.