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.
Internet neologism. This term appears in various social media, but I can't find any sources that meet the criteria spelled out in
WP:RSLooie496 (
talk) 22:10, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - via what Wikipedia is not
WP:NAD, past references referred to misc sites like blogs and social media which aren't reliable.
Adog104Talk to me 00:36, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete. I concur with the above. Search results turn up nothing but social media, and I find it highly unlikely that this term is used in print media. It's way too soon for this neologism to have an article.
NinjaRobotPirate (
talk) 10:26, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete I agree with the above as well; nothing more than a neologism online. Is seemingly coined by one person who seems to be attempting to sell the term. No references whatsoever. Almost no results in social media, none in print media. An attempt to derive from the Latin expression de novo which does not mean frequent change or anything dependent on mood etymologically. Also, the flag is a crudely drawn symbol created by one individual on a
tumblr page. No official sign, website, or organization. Seems to be fair for deletion. It seems to be an attempt to convey an abstract idea with no substantiated source, nothing more. [1]Magic1551 (
talk) 01:59, 7 December 2015 (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.