Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bulletproof Chinese - Wikipedia

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bulletproof Chinese (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Likely neologism. No sources. Googling for "bulletproof Chinese" yields very few results, many of which are not relevant here. Contested prod. eaolson 04:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Likely the author's neologism, failing WP:NFT. Sr13 (T|C) ^{Editor review} 05:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Neologism, doesn't meet criteria; per nom. - Denny 05:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I thought this was the sequel to Bulletproof Monk. Croxley 06:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Is this even a real thing?--Sefringle 06:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as neologism and/or hoax Travelbird 08:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, Travelbird. Pig^man_{Talk to me} 19:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I don't think this is an actual hoax. For example, see [1]. I just think it's a term that hasn't caught on yet. eaolson 19:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Appears to be original research, and highly POV. Ohconfucius 07:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless a few reliable sources are added to the article. John Vandenberg 14:40, 27 February 2007 (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.