Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vajazzling

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, per WP:NEO and WP:NOTDICTIONARY, with no prejudice towards redirecting to Body art. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vajazzling

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

Non-notable neologism. Dictionary definition at best - the article fails to establish anything beyond the meaning of the word and the fact that it was used once. Rhomb (talk) 12:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There has been coverage in multiple reliable sources, beyond mentioning that Jennifer Love Hewitt used the term once in an interview: Sydney Morning Herald [1], New York Magazine [2] and BlackBook Magazine [3] dissolve ^talk 18:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A pity, then, that these reliable sources are talking about decoration of the pubic mound in general (pubedazzling?) rather than the labia majora. Even if not, they are sources for the meaning of the word, which is dictionary material. If the meaning of the word hasn't stabilised it clearly isn't ready for the dictionary, let alone an encyclopaedia. Rhomb (talk) 07:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Followup: I see someone has changed the article to reflect these sources. If it isn't even clear what the word means ... Rhomb (talk) 07:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This may have caught on to the point where it's appropriate for a dictionary, but I don't see how it's an encyclopedic topic. ReverendWayne (talk) 02:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Give it a chance to be...embiggened.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 03:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:NEO, this isn't yet a cultural touchstone, more an online urban dictionary thing. MBisanz ^talk 03:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to have attracted enough attention to warrant having an article. Everyking (talk) 03:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Body art. It's the phrase of the moment. -- Whpq (talk) 22:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Body art or something about cosmetics. I'm troubled by the idea that this is entirely an attempt to sell books for Jennifer Love Hewitt (and perhaps crystals for Swarovski); I expect this neologism will have vanished within a year and that this is a variant of WP:BLP1E. I don't think that documentation of these "wordoids" is what Wikipedia is set up to do; this is Wiktionary's territory. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with the above users and there is definitely growing interest in it. @Accounting4Taste: The article may look a bit like "publicity" for Jennifer Love Hewitt at the moment, but thats only beacuse its a new article which has yet to grow. As the topic becomes bigger over time and article expands, the reference to Hewitt will look less prominent and be just confined to the "history" section. well unless she decides to launch a line of "vajazzling crystals" or something lol. but anyway i think you get my point. The article will grow, have no doubt... 81.154.253.88 (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I do indeed take your point; I believe it's referred to here by the short form WP:NEXTBIGTHING. In the meantime, I think you'll have to allow me to retain my doubt. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:14, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Body art per WP:NEO]] and WP:NOTDICTIONARY. The term doesn't meet notability of something like Truthiness or Metrosexual yet and Wikipedia doesn't keep pages that may become more notable later (some of the thoughts from WP:CRYSTAL). ZacBowling ^(user|talk) 21:56, 13 March 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.