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, pretty clear-cut mostly. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 01:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banhammer[edit]

This article was listed for speedy deletion, but does not meet any of the criteria. I'm only listing this here to gather consensus, this is NOT A VOTE. Mo0[talk] 05:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as neologism. --Mysidia (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dlete per above. --Ter e nc e Ong 10:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hammertime!, uh, sorry, Delete as neologism. --Agamemnon2 11:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agreed. The Deviant 16:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --NaconKantari 21:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nonsense. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 14:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. I've heard it before, but only in some pretty esoteric places. The folks at Bungie Studios seem particularly fond of it, but that's it. KrazyCaley 04:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable slang term, just count the Google hits. Grue 17:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Yes, it has some hits, and some awesome photoshop homages. In a couple of months, this term could take off, and it would undeniably deserve its own page. As of today, though, a Wiki article would serve no purpose. --Mareino 21:40, 24 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.