Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xera-

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. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Xera-

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A coined prefix by a Wikipedia user who was excited to create this article. Georgia guy (talk) 18:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait: Only transmitting informations from Googology Wikia and a presumed leaker. I think it is better to wait before having confirmations. ExplosionRadiative 2.0 (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. ― Padenton|✉ 19:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Brief mention here: Talk:Metric_prefix#xera (has 1 source, a dead link, doesn't seem promising) The only source in the article is [1] which describes it as being used in a new york times hoax and as a "leaked official prefix". How can a prefix be 'leaked'? The prefixes are international standards, if they aren't publicly known they don't exist. A search at the General Conference on Weights and Measures website has 0 results, I'm calling BS. Disclosure: I have removed a link to Xera from Yotta- which was added at this diff here ― Padenton|✉ 19:36, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NEO. Not the subject of significant secondary coverage in reliable sources. Wikis are not acceptable sources, and neither are things some guy told you late at night in a bar. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Borderline WP:CSD#A11 speedy as obviously made-up. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Made up or otherwise, it does not seem to have any coverage in any reliable source that I can find. If it does come into use, well, there is no deadline. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:17, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it is a neologism. Spumuq (talq) 14:23, 11 May 2015 (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.