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 merge to Mark Simpson (journalist). ...applying editorial judgment at the target, of course. WP:NEO sets a high bar; the WP:USEFUL argument is generally a weak argument at best and was discounted as such j⚛e decker^talk 17:04, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spornosexual[edit]

Spornosexual (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable neologism. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:56, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support a merge to Mark Simpson (journalist) --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:17, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:TOOSOON at best. --Finngall ^talk 17:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• A single-sourced neologism for a sexual aesthetic that's existed for years and didn't really need a name? Delete. I'd also accept redirection to Mark Simpson, as has been proposed by others — it certainly merits a passing mention in his article even if it doesn't warrant a standalone article yet. Bearcat (talk) 21:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Mark Simpson (journalist), its creator. It does have some press[1][2] but could still be a flash-in-the-pan, forgotten tomorrow; could easily be covered in Simpson's article, where it would benefit from contextual information. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Or rather Deletometastic, which is a word I just made up combining the words "delete," "metastasize," and "fantastic." Non-notable neologism. No redirect needed, the term has no currency. Carrite (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge contents into the Mark Simpson page. It is just too soon to tell if this term will catch on. (Tigerghost (talk) 03:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC))[reply]
• Merge into Mark Simpson (journalist) or Metrosexual, leave redirection. --Bazi (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No redirect too neologistic. Fails WP:GNG. Not really in usage, just a witticism. --Bejnar (talk) 02:01, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as has multiple [3] [4] [5] [6] (just to list a few) reliable sources specifically on this term. Mathmo ^Talk 06:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as it is being used in newspapers in Italy and probably other European countries. I detest this neologism, but I think a wikipedia page on it can be useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.183.35.7 (talk) 12:27, 17 June 2014 (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.