Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noob tube

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. Cirt (talk) 02:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noob tube

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

Twice prodded article; I placed 1st PROD and removed the 2nd, replacing it with this AfD. PROD rationales were: (1) WP:NEO; (2) No real content, no references, dubious notability I42 (talk) 11:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As the editor who placed the second PROD, my views on the matter are pretty clear. The article has many problems, from notability to lack of sources, but the biggest one for me is that it's lacking in any semblance of encyclopedic value. It may deserve a mention in Urban Dictionary (has one), but not here. Throwaway85 (talk) 11:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete by WP:N --DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 12:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above but with Comment - PROD tags are not supposed to be placed on twice, even if they are removed in bad faith... Blodance (talk) 13:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My bad. Wasn't aware of the first when I applied the second. Throwaway85 (talk) 13:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obscure gamers term not worthy of an article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all of the above, particularly WP:NEO. —DoRD (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete exceedingly minor slang term that apparently applies to a single game, article is apparently an excuse for the author to complain about the mechanics of a certain weapon in said game. Ludicrously unencyclopedic. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Actually, it's a pretty common term that applies to First Person Shooters in general rather than to a single game or even a specific weapon. As the article, without sources, suggests otherwise, there's not much point in keeping it around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archer884 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 14:46, 18 January 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.