 | Linguistics High‑importance | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Marketing & Advertising High‑importance | ||||||
| |||||||
 Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Nobody is going to confuse “buzzword” with “Buzzwole”
Pokémon fans already know that the Pokémon in question’s name is not buzzword, people who don’t know much about Pokémon won’t even know that Buzzwole exists Cretaceousa (talk) 02:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Merge from Buzzword bingo
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The result of the discussion was not merged. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
I have major concerns whether Buzzword bingo is a notable concept, but instead of trial by fire at AfD, how about we consider merging it here first? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose, given that the referenced support independent notability. Klbrain (talk) 17:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Agreement with @Klbrain. They are two different topics, and cannot mutually support each other in one article. I also disagree that it is a article suitable for AfD, as it seems to be a notable topic and has a quite few references. Apologies for the late reply. Explodicator7331 (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per previous arguments. The topic is different and both are notable. PhotographyEdits (talk) 12:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
History
Roman common people (average folks) 2603:9000:2503:E79B:8D6E:69F3:F30F:3D4E (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Cleanup
I've boldly removed the unreferenced terms from this list, since they're apparently words that someone was tired of hearing at the moment and not anchored in any linguistic analysis or critical review. -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)