Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HoYay

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. Sr13 02:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HoYay[edit]

HoYay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

UnsouYay Will ^{(We're flying the flag all over the world)} 02:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No reliable sources and the greater part of the article fails WP:OR. CIreland 03:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as neologism. Wikipedia is not urban dictionary. DarkAudit 03:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete OR. - Crockspot 04:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above -Drdisque 06:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete. As I have said previously, 90% of neologism articles should be shot on sight. As DarkAudit has correctly pointed out Wikipedia is not urban dictionary. ---Cathal 15:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Apparently a term used on blogs by viewers of TV shows. No refs presented to show it has reached the level of a commonly used word, and that would only get it a spot in Wiktionary, not a Wikipedia article. Full of weaselwords and O.R.Edison 15:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki to Wiktionary. Billy227, Review my account!! ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 18:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:OR and failing any kind of notability. Article is just a list of very POV ways homoeroticism could be (rather pruriently) interpreted in a number of television shows. It might as well be titled "Times I have watched TV and thought it was totally gay". Ford MF 07:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It's a neologism but it's not exactly OR. But the fact that it's used by some people in the industry and commonly used on one major website's forums doesn't make it notable in my book. -- Seed 2.0 17:44, 17 May 2007 (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.