Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pterippi

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 of the debate was DELETE. Owen× ☎ 20:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

neologism Melaen 17:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Seems to be a reasonable keep, though as it stands, this is more a dicdef than an article. Denni ☯ 01:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as
  hoax. All Ghits are for Wikipedia mirrors of an old version of Pegasus, which has had that sentence removed (it must have only been in the article for a short time), and an Everything2 article. If it were verifiable (which I doubt) I would say merge with Pegasus. (Not a neologism.) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 02:17Z
• OMG, that's gotta be the most annoying template message ever, complete with a cutesy cartoon character. I want to delete it. The article is a mild delete in itself. --Agamemnon2 06:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is fishy. 212 Google hits for this word, many of them re-iterations of this same phrasing. 0 Google Book Search hits. 0 Google Scholar Hits. Even if verifiable, this would be a dicdef or candidate for mention at Pegasus. Fictional creatures don't require species. --Lockley 07:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete. The notion that this term comes from Greek mythology, though stated elsewhere on the internet, is ridiculous. There's no such Greek word, and if there were "Pterippi" wouldn't be the plural anyway--the plural of hippos is hippoi.
  Chick Bowen 02:32, 25 January 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.