Deletion of LAMO

Comment: In addition to the policies Townlake mentions above, you may want to read rystal: if the phrase is 'gaining popularity' and continues to do so until it becomes widespread and gets mentioned in reliable sources we can re-create the article. Until then though, keeping the page based on speculation about how common it ''will'' become is unnecessary. Also, above you quote that "Notability is distinct from... popularity" and in the next sentence say "Its gotten popularity, so it counts as being notable." Since 'distinct' means 'different', your argument doesn't seem to hold much water. Best
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)

Comment: I don't think this falls under a speedy criteria (not incoherent, not a hoax, not A7-eligible, etc.), but this is unsourceable and falls under |Wikipedia is not for things made up one day.  Respectfully recommend the creator read up on Wikipedia's policies on |verifiability and |reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:NFT||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: OMG a ball fight! {sigh} Popular with you and your friends a Wikipedia article |does not make
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW||WP:MADEUP)