Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edupunk
This neologism has received some coverage by reliable sourceshttp://blogs.guardian.co.uk/mortarboard/2008/06/punk_or_more_precisely.htmlhttp://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/article/3045/frustrated-with-corporate-course-management-systems-some-professors-go-edupunk,however, the coverage of it hasn't been significant enough. If all the information in the article was sourced by reliable sources, then pretty much all you would have in the article is a definition, and that would go against the Wikipedia:Five pillars|first of the 5 Pillars, and |WP:NOT. Also, the definition would be rather vague
— User:SJP, 12:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOTDICDEF (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)