Talk:spinfinity

If you are going to delete this entire, at least give me a reason. Don't be a hoser.

The entry you created (spinfinity) seems to have been a protologism and has been deleted. If you are sure that it is a real word, please provide evidence of this word being used in durably archived media (mainly printed books, and usenet groups) as required by our inclusion criteria. For a term to be included, it must be used by at least three different authors over more than a year, and the authors must be actually using the word, not just explaining its meaning or stating that it exists. If you can find any such quotations, please add them to Citations:spinfinity. Conrad.Irwin 17:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Give me some time to finish the entry. I was working on it when you deleted it. That is what I call being a hoser!

I have added citations to me entry. If more are needed I will do so. Please let me know instead of just tossing it.

The citations you have placed in the citations tab do not qualify under our policies. In short, three examples of use of the word in a durably archived source (e.g. a book) need to be found. The Art direction one does not include the actual quote. The UNC Daily quote does not match any of the definitions given. The Colossal Book of Mathematic suffers from both of the previous issues. The final bit is not the kind of thing which goes in the citations space at all. I have deleted the entry yet again, but have left the citations tab. If you can get that up to speed the entry will be restored. I should also note that further recreation of the entry or further insults at our users will likely result in a block. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 18:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply