Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Himbo

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 Deleted Viridae^Talk 11:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Himbo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Dicdef/neologism that's already present on Wiktionary. Seraphimblade 07:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. MER-C 08:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Blimey but that's a lot of work on this article! Nonetheless, it doesn't advance beyond a dicdef: so delete. Vizjim 10:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. - Mailer Diablo 12:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I almost feel bad about this, it's so well referenced and everything. But delete as dicdef. riana_dzasta 13:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Rewrite - I tried prodding but the original author an removed it without correcting the problem. Rklawton 14:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a matter of record, I am not the original author, and I *did* point out quite clearly in my edit summary when I removed the prod, why the prod was inappropriate. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 05:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • No you didn't. A summary reading: Removed inappropriate stub notice and cleaned up list isn't clear at all. Rklawton 14:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, User:Cimon Avaro's edit summary reads "Needs editing, but appears to be a real concept on a par with bimbo, removing PROD and wikifying leadin sentence. Needs to be NPOVed, and probably most of the list needs to go." Seems clear to me. Vizjim 10:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for correcting my error. I was reading the wrong edit summary. Rklawton 15:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to Bimbo. - FireSpike Editor Review! 23:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. ReverendG 23:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and Redirect to Bimbo. "Himbo" is a well-enough established term that it warrants a paragraph in the bimbo article, similar to how "it boy" is noted in the It girl article (which, full disclosure, I added following the redirect of It boy to It girl). Otto4711 02:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete from Wikipedia; add to Wiktionary if it's not already there. I first heard this word ~24 years ago, and it's certainly a real word. But we're not a dictionary. WMMartin 16:38, 28 November 2006 (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.