Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faboost
=[[Faboost]]=
:{{la|Faboost}} – (
:({{Find sources|Faboost}})
Contested prod.; subject lacks notability as per WP:GNG and is not encyclopedic as per WP:DICDEF. Guoguo12--Talk-- 00:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Can't find anything usable to save this one. --> Gggh talk/contribs 11:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Strong delete, quoting the article: "FABOOST was a word created... on 14th October 2010".--Hongkongresident (talk) 13:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Strong delete, non-notable neologism. —C.Fred (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback on what is wrong with the article i have been improving it daily we have now reference to video of the words origin and also chloe's twitter has origins of the word the article has only just started so i am trying to update it daily up to a good standard for you guy the reason i created this page is by request and the word is picking up a lot and if carry on like it is could be a word that will be used a lot in social situations. So please don't delete it i will try and sort out the problem people are having with the wiki i have had a lot of positive feedback and i am hoping it informs people of the words origins if wondering and that it also helps people pick the word up. I was shock it was requested for deletion and will improve on what people are having problems with but feedback is feedback and i will try and fix it to your needs. Thanks Arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 21:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
::The problem is that there's no evidence of independent sources using or discussing the word. In the case of a neologism like this, the requirement is to show widespread usage. Showing videos, tweets, and other primary sources won't meet that hurdle. —C.Fred (talk) 22:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
::Along with the valid Wikipedia-is-not-a-dictionary concerns, note that this word was created a day ago, which virtually guarantees that there won't be any reliable sources for it. The article has a snowball's chance in hell at getting kept. However, what you can do, and probably should do, is copy and paste the article into a user subpage, like User:Arianinja/Faboost. There, you can tinker with the article all you want, and if it somehow does manage to get as much mainstream press as a phrase like stay the course or truthiness, then you might have a case for its inclusion. But until that happens, this article shouldn't be in the Wikipedia namespace.--Hongkongresident (talk) 22:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Notice: I have corrected the layout of the page to match the recommendations at WP:AfD. No text has been altered. Guoguo12--Talk-- 22:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
::I heard this in the interview and later googled it to find this article. I do think it is relevant and has already started going viral through twitter and other social networking websites. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, and faboost isn't even a real word. The purpose of the article is not to define a word, but to show how such a trendy word came to be, its origins, what it means, and how it has spread. Mases26 (talk) 08:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi guys Arianinja here i am happy that i am getting alot of feedback and i am trying to keep the wikipedia page and up to date as i can any new information on the word how it is spreading on the creators of the words chloe and kobi. I understand your points on how it can be seen under that wiki is not a dictionary but so can pretty much any article on wikipedia because they all have the meaning of the word. The reason for that is with out the meaning of the word you can not expand on what your article is and that is exactly what it is. I am trying to inform people of the word and also keep people update with the meaning, news, Creators, websites, videos and how it's spreading exact what wikipedia for tell and informing people about things. People are all giving me good feedback including the Lovefilm who originally shot the interview so i am planning to keep it as up to date as i can with new and how its spreading and uses of the word.You could say it is neologism but thats not what i am just trying to achieve i am trying to inform people of the origins and the world of faboost. also to your other point i have now referenced the video of the creation of the word, the let me in facebook page were they link to the wikipedia page and comment on the creation of the word. Also chloe grace moretz's twitter page where the word is used throughly. Also i have created the subpage thing if what i don't want to happern happerns
Thank Arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 11:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
::I tried to defend this article, but failed. Subject is non-notable. The only way to save this article from deletion is to find at least one reliable secondary source. Try to avoid primary sources, it's a waste of your precious time and effort. If you can't provide secondary sources, this nomination will almost certainly be successful and article will be deleted. --> Gggh talk/contribs 19:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
I have now put up a link to the word being traded mark for something in medicine it is up on the wikipedia page now and has a link to prove it thanks Arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 09:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
:If there were some sort of a product related to the trademark, then that might be something to hang a separate/new article on. However, there's no mention of a product at Trademarkia, so it comes down to the word not being actually used for anything. Wikipedia is not a collection of miscellaneous trivia, nor a dictionary of trademarked terms, so that does not give any more reason for the article to be kept. —C.Fred (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I think a lot of people are being to hard on this article i mean it explain what it is. It informs people it backs up every point it can with references and links. It generally isn't that bad i mean i worked hard on it and if you look on the history i update daily with new information link etc. So if it get deleted i know i worked hard on it and i tried to stop the deletion. I agree with some of your points but i will keep trying to improve on your points until it gets deleted but i will have to hope it's not deleted. Thanks for the feedback Arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 10:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
:Also, Chloë's tweets or posts on other social networking websites are generally not acceptable as sources per WP:TWITTER. --> Gggh talk/contribs 14:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
The wikipedia page has not been deleted yet so i will try and find even for sources thanks arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 16:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi guys again i don't know how to edit it to link it to other articles as a orphan article as am going to like it to chloe's and Kodi's wikipedia but not sure how to do it???
Thanks again Arianinja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianinja (talk • contribs) 16:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. Faboost may have come to Chloe's mind spontaneously but she was not the first one. There's is in fact a reference at Trademarkia showing that this is a trademarked term registered by Bayer in 2006 [http://www.trademarkia.com/faboost-77011934.html]. De728631 (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
: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.