The result was merge/redirect. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-referenced dicdef, essentially unchanged since creation in 2007 - not an encyclopaedic entry. Emeraude (talk) 09:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of an alternate solution - You can merge this article to a section in Foreshadowing and create a "redirect with possibilities" to that section, if you don't think it merits a stand-alone article. The concept is relevant there and we have reliable sources connecting both topics. What do you think? Diego (talk) 10:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If Diego is willing to execute his proposal I'd be happy to go with his plan (and change my vote), otherwise if nobody is going to volunteer to change the article I think we'd be better off without it. --Salimfadhley (talk) 20:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]