Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cockblock (2nd nomination)
Users voting for deletion raised some valid concerns. The article only had one reliable source. To address these concerns, I rewrote the entire article to include multiple sources, and I removed all the blog sources. Some of the new sources are ''about'' the term and engage in extensive discussion of it (e.g. types of cockblocking), so it passes . Although some users in this AFD expressed a lack of interest in the minutiae of cockblocking, these minutiae are discussed in reliable sources and consequently includable in this article, now that it has better sources. This article cannot be merged with seduction community, because of its size, and because the term is used outside it (by college students, by political commentators, and as the name of a lesbian dance club). Since the article is completely rewritten with the goal of accommodating the concerns of this AFD, I propose that this AFD be closed. If my rewrite is deemed unsatisfactory, then it should be relisted for a new AFD with a clean slate (since this AFD already contains votes for deletion that do not apply to the current form of the article
— User:SecondSight, 09:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NEO (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)