Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pigmanship

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 of the debate was delete. W.marsh 00:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pigmanship

Vanity neologism, almost certainly unverifiable. CDC (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, non-notable neologism. 57 Google hits are about animal husbandry. -- Mithent 02:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nn neologism. Savidan 02:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not for things made up in ~~school~~ College. --light darkness^(talk) 02:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Violates WP:NFT Snowball Earth Hypothesis 03:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lightdarkness Ruby 03:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Dustimagic *\o/* ^{(talk/contribs)} *\o/* 03:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Oink oink oink! Remohol 03:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. VegaDark 04:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all terms coined by four Harvard graduates. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] 21:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Useless info and word --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 00:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nn philosphizing. Blnguyen 04:00, 13 February 2006 (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.