Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oppa Budae

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. postdlf (talk) 02:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppa Budae

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

Article fails WP:NEO. There are several Google hits, but not enough coverage to satisfy any notability guideline. Andrew³²⁷ 21:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Neologism with almost no significant coverage in reliable sources. The article itself doesn't establish notability. Lugia2453 (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 04:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 08:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a definition-only stub with no indication of notability for the underlying concept. Cnilep (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2013 (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.