Talk:Pajamahadeen

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

from Vfd[edit]

On 26 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. There was no consensus. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pajamahadeen for a record of the discussion.

So, who coined it? ThePedanticPrick 16:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?[edit]

A merge is definately in order; the only question is which page is correct? I'm not sure which spelling is more common, but given Mujahideen is the correct spelling of that word, I tend to think this spelling, Pajamahideen, is preferable. —BenFrantzDale 21:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to the more common usage of the word even though it is "more correct" the other way. Reflex Reaction 15:12, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.nationalreview.com/tks/052840.html
- In Pajamahadeen on Mon Jul 17 15:30:06 2006, 404 Not Found
- In Pajamahadeen on Thu Jul 27 00:48:04 2006, 404 Not Found

maru (talk) contribs 04:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed PRod[edit]

Removed {{dated prod|concern = {{{concern|Reason [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary WP:NOT Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Suggest move to Wiktionary]}}}|month = September|day = 1|year = 2006|time = 02:57|timestamp = 20060901025721}} prod because this article contains data beyond that which is normally incorporated into definitions and that material has sufficient merit to warrant retention. Williamborg (Bill) 03:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

November 2007[edit]

I've just done some tidying up of this article.

I found that "pajamahadeen" was voted Most Creative Word of 2004 by the American Dialect Society, added that info and therefore removed the recently-added {{notability}} tag.
I've updated or replaced some broken links, but couldn't update the link to Andrew Sullivan's article, "Retorting 101", at The New Republic's website. (It was web-only.) The best link I could find was http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5992267/#040915, which has a long excerpt from Sullivan's article. (The Wayback Machine was stymied by TNR's login screen.) Perhaps when TNR gets their website revamp finished, we'll be able to link it. Cheers, CWC 13:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]