The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Slurge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A bit of poli sci jargon which seemingly hasn't caught on. I did see a few book hits, mostly recent enough to where they could depend on us, but far and away most hits were proper names. Mangoe (talk) 05:20, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Politics, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Appears to be fringe coinage. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary anyways. Yue🌙 09:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I've never heard this term before, and a Google search turns up nothing. WP:NEOLOGISM applies here. 12:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Couldn't find anything that could be included in the article beyond a dictionary definition, or any indication that this is a notable concept beyond being proposed in one paper. Another option would be to merge into Incumbent, which already contains the definition of Sophomore surge, but my feeling is that would be undue given that this doesn't even seem to be a mainstream or widely discussed concept in studies of incumbency. MCE89 (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.