Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FYG (2nd nomination)

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. No arguments for this article's inclusion have been made. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:27, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYG

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unencyclopedic WP:DICDEF, unsourced acronym. CSDed in previous AfD in 2010, but I have no idea if this is at all related. If it is, I think it is speediable again. MSJapan (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Prior AfD (and CSD) is unrelated, referring to a Linux Distro. This is referring to an acronym. We stick acronyms in our massive List of acronyms article, and this specifically would go into List of acronyms: F#FY Fieari (talk) 01:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:27, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unsourced WP:DICDEF. I think I've come across one or more of the lists of acronyms before, but looking at e.g. List of acronyms: F it's looking a bit wikianachronistic. Around for 11 years with no talk page and, tons of content, and almost no sources. More or less a user-generated free-for-all for plausible-sounding acronyms. Merging unsourced content is even more problematic as adding it in the first place. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:57, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Uncited. Slid over to this title in 2010 when the unrelated topic was CSD. This has been uncited for a decade, no less. It's a DICDEF that may be a "neoligism that doesn't even have the merit of being newish". FeatherPluma (talk) 23:33, 4 July 2016 (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.