Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Greek Defence

: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. Michig (talk) 09:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

=[[The Greek Defence]]=

:{{la|The Greek Defence}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|The Greek Defence}})

Seems to fail WP:NOT#NEWS; there's no evidence that this has any lasting coverage, or, indeed, even notability at the time. Ironholds (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

:I note that one of the "sources" provided was a blog written by the author of this article. Sigh. Ironholds (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete A non-notable (though clever) phrase used in a political exchange about a year and a half ago by Ed Miliband. A commentator or two repeated it, but it received no significant coverage, and by now, has been pretty much forgotten. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete The article's claim to notability rests on the last sentence about the phrase becoming widely used. Unfortunately there isn't a shred of evidence that this is the case. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 07:58, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete. For a term to have a stand-alone article in Wikipedia, there needs to be widespread evidence of common use. As I found zero hits on GNews for articles containing both "Greek Defence" and "Liberal Democrats" I don't believe this is the case. Suspect the real motive of teh article ws to get this term in common use because Wikpedia says it is. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 07:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
  • NOTE The article has a link to this discussion, however, many people are not going to realize that as it appears as a redlink. I have never seen anything like that __meco (talk) 09:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete As noted above, coverage in reliable sources came to abrupt end after the Miliband stuff left the news cycle, making it one event stuff. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2012 (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.