Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet stuttering

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) 01:43, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Internet stuttering

Almost certainly a hoax. —Bkell (talk) 08:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unsourced, and at worst a hoax or joke. - Richard Cavell (talk) 08:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per above The Rolling Camel (talk) 09:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - spurious sources, probably a joke. Kafka Liz (talk) 11:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I was ready to hit the button, when I found a hit on Google Scholar linguistics study that mentions an Internet Stuttering Home Page. Unfortunately, the abstract cut off there and I don't have access to the full thing, but there may be an article in here. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand the reference correctly, it is referring to prolonged-speech resources mentioned in the Speak Easy Association's newsletter and on the Stuttering Home Page (on the Internet) located here. I don't think it's referring to the alleged phenomenon described in this article. Kafka Liz (talk) 11:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per Richardcavell. Dengero (talk) 12:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hoaxery, and I didn't stutter! MuZemike (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
D-d-d-delete: per WP:HOAX. I can find no evidence that the single reference, "Stuttering: The Many Different Kinds by Ryan Simmons," even exists. Cosmic Latte (talk) 21:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - Likely hoax, or maybe a joke. _David ^WS _(contribs) 22:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it appears to be a hoax. Majoreditor (talk) 05:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Definition is unclear and there are no 3rd party reliable references or psychological studies to make this anything but a probable hoax. - DustyRain (talk) 09:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I have never seen an article only three sentences long on Wikipedia (barring other AfDs). Most likely some person's idea of "funny", since I can't find any sources. gm_matthew (talk) 23:18, 26 November 2008 (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.