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. Cirt (talk) 18:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poklen[edit]

Poklen (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 lacks reliable sources to meet the general notability guideline or any other guidelines to inclusion in Wikipedia. Only two sources are given, urbandictionary and a blog, neither of which are remotely reliable. A Google News search didn't uncover anything either.

Wikipedia isn't for things made up in a day, or for an essay about random social circles backed up by zero solid data. tedder (talk) 05:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This edit, by one of the contributors to the article, makes a fairly solid case for deletion per Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, and Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Uncle G (talk) 05:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Uncle G - self-confessed original research and not verifiable. JohnCD (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brunei-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 10:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original author has made a note on the discussion page asking other contributors to give sources verifiable by any party that is interested, but sadly there are no legible sources that can be provided, and such is fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahizwan 88 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is that an observation or a delete !vote? Certainly it appears sources haven't been found. tedder (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 23:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Uncle G said it all. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No reliable references provided except a blog / cannot find any relaible on except from The Urban Dictionary [1]. Author admitted that facts are based on personal opinions which totally fails Wikipedia's guidelines. This article belongs in a blog or a personal website and not on Wikipedia. Jolenine (Talk - My Contribs) 00:50, 3 October 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.