Deletion of AL (actually laughing)

Comment: However, the difference is that the article on LOL ''does'' in fact have |reliable sources. No, not every source that turns up in a google search will be reliable, but they exist. Fact of the matter is that I cannot, nor can others, find a single reliable source for this term. The policies of |notability and |verifiability apply to every single article on Wikipedia, and unless they can be met (i.e., a reliable source can be shown for this term), this article cannot be kept
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: Can't find any references for this, or any mentions in the external link(s). Seems to be a |made up word, which |isn't in common usage (per the article itself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:NOTMADEUP||WP:NEO)

Comment: It needs to be notable in terms of having caught mainstream attention and being referenced by reliable sources (see ), and that does not appear to be the case (I know personal experience is not sufficient to judge, but I've never received an email, a text, an IM, or any electronic communication with "AL" in it myself - though I've had thousands of LOLs, LMAOs, ROFLs etc) . However, if some reliable sources can be found, I'd then suggest making it a redirect to LOL, in the same way as LMAO and ROFL - there is far more  detail in the article as it stands (There's no "Official Origins", for example, as there is no official text acronym body, and some of it is just talking of text acronyms in general
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: per  and . Rankiri took the words right out of my mouth. '''Erpert
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO||WP:MADEUP)