Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Fjact

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was djelete. - Mailer Diablo 06:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Fjact

Utterly non-notable term. Gets 67 hits on google, almost all unrelated to this term. gkhan 18:40, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete MicroFeet 18:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Is commonly used in the forum cited. --Cheese Sandwich vote wikified by gkhan

It has to be more notable than just being used in one forum (especially a forum that in itself isn't in wikipedia, which www.reefs.org doesn't appear to be) gkhan 19:01, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

I'll defer to the good judgement of the admins, however I'll note that it is a well established forum, in operation for over 4 years, with a relatively large readership (the site overall has 5000+ members). In any case, I'll suggest to the site owners that they catalogue this site in wikipedia (it is a notable resource in the saltwater aquarium hobby, and "The Sump" is the off-topic discussion area). Thanks for your time. --Cheese Sandwich

• KeepI have seen several words here used in small circles unrelated to wikipedia. And I agree with Cheese...ask any saltwater aquarist about reefs.org and they will know it is an important source of information for a very popular hobby. Thanks, Manny

users only edit gkhan 19:32, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. gkhan, don't give these guys any more ideas! Sdedeo 19:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry, wont happen again :P gkhan 19:32, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete injoke, the importance of reefs.org has no bearing on anything. Ben-w 19:29, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• What constitutes enough baring on anything to allow a word to be recorded in the annals of this illustrious internet word bank? Let’s not forget, wikipedia is an internet based phenomenon that allows people to change the meaning of the language with modern speech. This word is internet related in nature, and therefore, it relates to this internet based site. The word is new and not widely used because it is internet forum based. Ask someone what a “blog” is a few years ago and see if they thought the word had any baring on anything. Thanks…I’m done now.
  • A few years ago, when blog was not a notable word, it wouldn't have merited an article. Now it is a notable concept, so it does. Wikipedia is not a means by which to spread your little in-joke made-up word. Come back to us when this is a concept in common currency among people other than your little group of piscine pals. Ben-w 21:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • 'Piscine Pals' - heh heh :). --Cheese Sandwich
  • (BTW, adding 'little', twice, in your description was a nice touch --CS)
• Speedy Delete not a useful addition at all. PT 19:37, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I agree with Cheese and Manny. Bierboy

users only edits on this page gkhan 19:58, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - I agree with Cheese, Manny, and Bierboy. Poptart

users only edit gkhan 20:06, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Useless neologism, apparently only used on a single Internet forum. (And even if it were used in any significant way, Wikipedia is not a dictionary.) Delete. (And votes from accounts which were created just in order to influence a VfD discussion will be disregarded.) - Mike Rosoft 20:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • 'Wikipedia is not a dictionary.' - Sure it is - I had to look up 'injoke', 'neologism', and 'sock-puppet' to understand the comments here. There they were, in Wikipedia. --Cheese Sandwich
• Delete neologism. Kill the sockpuppets Dunc|☺ 20:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Djelete this nelogism. Allegrorondo 20:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • 'Djelete' - Ok, that was funny. :) --Cheese Sandwich
    • doing my part to keep spirits up so we can deal with Kukla, Fran, and Ollie around here. :) Allegrorondo 21:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, and thanks to the sock-puppets for making an easy decision easier. --Scimitar ^parley 20:29, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Actually, fjact is a word I have heard used before. It usually refers to baseless political spin that is totally contrived and fabricated for the sake of proving a point.

users only edit gkhan 20:46, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Dont let let the delete nazis change the fjact that this would be a great addition to Wikipedia. - Dave

user's only edit gkhan 21:15, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Milz'd due to a small perturbation Barkingsheltie 21:04, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

user's only edit gkhan 21:15, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - That's the fjact Jjack (seven)

user's fjirst and only edit gkhan 21:15, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Fjact is Amjerican slang used in many fylker, including Sogn og Fjordane and Sør-Trøndelag. Hjiddendragonet

user has..ohh, why do I bjother? gkhan 21:24, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

comment Any word that brings this many brand new users to this site can't be bad right?  ;-) I do get a sense of over potectiveness from the delete fjascists though.

• Speedy. Protests aside, there's no reason to even have this. If you want to catalog your own in-group information you can start your own wiki.  RasputinAXP  talk * contribs 21:28, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• comment "Start your own club" he he he
• Delete. No evidence that this word exists. There appears to be an unrelated non-English word with the same spelling. ManoaChild 21:47, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• New words enter the lexicon all of the time. Someone above cited "blog" as an example. I'm sure that there are many examples of words that are new and strange at first that are now considered a normal part of the lexicon. --- Bierboy
• KeepI for one think that fjact should be a part of the English language. Why? Well, because there are all kinds of English words that give teachers teaching young children to read absolute fits because they are not spelled the way they sound. Furthermore, adding Fjact to Wikipedia will increase Wikipedia's accuracy. There are people in this world who use the word Fjact all the time. And I do mean all the time, in fact some of those people use it so much that it just gets tiring, and I end up making my way to bjed for the evening. -- kjnucklehead

User has only edited on this page Mr. Know-It-All 05:16, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep* Haters be danged. Fjact is as good as it gets.I use it daily, and look what its done for me! -- Muad'dib
• Keep* If not for things like this, new words would never be coined, such as "Danked". Gimme a freakin break. -- Hesaias ;)
• KeepThis word may have started on only one forum (RDO), but it has already gained the status of not needing an explanation there, and I, for one, have seen it appear on other Reef related forums. Give this a year. If it doesn't spread any further, then maybe delete this. I'd hate Wikipedia to miss a chance to be ahead of the curve... -- burntom
• Gentle Wikipedia Moderators* - Since you all agree that this (and the other term I have submitted, 'milz') can be classified as an 'unstable neologism', I have entered these words here: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:List_of_protologisms I assume that that is acceptable... --Cheese Sandwich
• Move to List_of_protologisms Fjact is a common term in Northeast Ohio, at least in my house. --3M TA3

user has only edited on this page. Mr. Know-It-All 05:22, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. A look at the sock-puppeting of this vote is proof enough of why this should be deleted. Mr. Know-It-All 02:44, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
• RETAIN: This has now become world-wide accepted terminology for auto-generated, unsubstantiated "facts." You absolutely must retain it as an entry, or risk losing credibility with a wide readership. And that, my friend, is a fjact. William Scott Associate Professor of Chemistry University of California, SC

This is the only edit by this IP user Mr. Know-It-All 05:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

• Djelete as fjast as pjossible. No joke. -- DS1953 05:00, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, the socks just make me vote delete, and the nominator and previous are right too, of course.-Splash 15:57, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
• no puppets here I just looked up "sock puppet" to see what you're talking about. Every single keep vote here came from a different person. Sure we all came from the same place, but have your admins check the IP addresses if you care. We're all in different cities.

• Keep* - This voting process is enough validation of the word Fjact that it must be kept. --Bucolic Buffalo

• MODERATORS - Is the Sexual slang article really necessary?? I mean... Wow. And here we are arguing over 'fjact', lol. Cheese Sandwich 18:38, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Boy, the necrophelia portion of it is a real treat. --CS

• Cheese...After that post, I believe you deserve "the supreme houdini" pulled on you!

Scary stuff 'round these parts gentlemen...scary stuff. Slightly sickened, Manny

• • Well I hope that doesn't involve any santorum - I'm trying to cut down. --Cheese Sandwich
• shocking...the only term I can use to describe the pedophelia section of that sexual slang article. Making light of such a serious topic seems a bit tasteless. How do I move to delete "michael jackson" from the list? I mean he was found innocent! I'm appalled...and it takes a heck of a lot to get me appalled, right Cheeso?  ;-) Manny
  • True, you usually qualify as the "appaller"... BTW, thought we are not sock-puppets, we do qualify as Meatpuppets. Manny, you are spicy Cuban meat (I presume). Cheese Sandwich 21:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Sexual slang also went up for deletion. It was an almost unanimous keep. Excepting your meatpuppets (good term btw) this is a unanimous delete. gkhan 21:59, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
      • "Meatpuppets" was defined in one of the sock-puppets topics. "Almost a unanimous keep", eh? How nice. Cheese Sandwich
      • Added my 2 cents in the "talk" section there. Cheese Sandwich
• Speedy Delete a sad day for Wikipedia when Fjact stays. Rkevins82 22:57, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • All right already, delete the d*mn thing, no need for dramatics. Be happy, 'fjact' will be gone & Sexual slang will still be here. Jeez. I concede. Cheese Sandwich 23:59, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

• I concede. Delete fjact (and milz). Like I said, I've included them in the protolisms page. --Cheese Sandwich 00:01, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and BJAODN this VFD Punkmorten 20:33, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- JamesTeterenko 18:49, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- why is this still here? David Henderson 05:35, 20 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.