As I said on the talk page, I don't see any evidence that this term is used by reputable critics. I suspect it to be a made up term. --Camembert 02:34, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Neologism. A total of 3 hits on Google (and you don't want to know what they are for). Delete. SWAdair | Talk 04:05, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
And so soon after breakfast, too. Delete and send the poster a bar of Zest, some Head and Shoulders and a can of Right Guard. Throw in a loofah just to be safe. - Lucky 6.9 16:17, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Neologism, unencyclopedic. Andrewa 01:58, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Appears to be a neologism. And, SWAdair, perhaps people do want to know what this neologism refers to. There is entirely nothing non-famous about Piss Christ by Andres Serrano, which (correct me if I'm wrong) so profoundly offended the conservative senses of middle America that it received the full sanctification of a TIME cover. Helen Chadwick's work with meat, flowers, and her own body cells, and her Piss Flowers bronzes were enough to earn her a nomination for the Turner Prize, a prestigious enough award. Delete, because it is a neologism, but shame on those of you who went "ewwwww." Looks like Serrano and Chadwick got exactly the reaction they expected. Denni 03:48, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)
Yes, the vote to delete was because it is a neologism. I don't let personal taste affect my decision as to whether or not something is valid. The parenthetical aside was meant jokingly -- maybe I should have included an emoticon. Oh... I still say "ewwwww." ;-) SWAdair | Talk 10:28, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Delete. The spelling isn't consistent from title to article and the concept is covered better in crusty.Fire Star 00:55, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
