Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guy with Camera (GWC)

:{{la|Guy with Camera (GWC)}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Guy_with_Camera_(GWC) Stats])

:({{Find sources|Guy with Camera (GWC)}})

WP:NOTDICT. Non-encyclopedic neologism. Kolbasz (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is

This is a standard phrase inside photography circles & has no other referance point — Preceding unsigned comment added by TenthEagle (talk • contribs) 16:50, 4 July 2013‎

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• Delete, only source is an unreliable blog. WP:NOTDICT has nothing to do with it, though. Angr (talk) 13:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

::*Keep [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gwc urban dictionary] — Preceding unsigned comment added by TenthEagle (talk • contribs) 20:29, 8 July 2013‎

• Delete. Neither Urban Dictionary nor the blog that quotes its definitions are reliable sources. I found only two hits in Google Books, both self-published volumes that do not appear in WorldCat. Notability is not established, nor does it seem likely to be established. Cnilep (talk) 03:26, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

::Correction: One of the books was republished by Focal Press and appears in WorldCat. Still, notability is far from established. Cnilep (talk) 03:35, 9 July 2013 (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.