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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The New Thing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Article based entirely on original research. One source links to a blog. The other links to Last.FM which is nothing more than a glorified blog that anyone can edit. The Real Libs-speak politely 23:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Even with the sources given, the phrase "the new thing" proves vague. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 01:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom; given the lack of sources, article appears to be entirely original research. Delete per WP:OR. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. prime example of Wikipedia:By your own bootstraps (well, we SHOULD have this as a policy)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - completely unreliable sourcing. -- Whpq (talk) 12:54, 30 September 2009 (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.