Talk:BANANA

Neologism?

There's a notable lack of references for this apparent neologism. Anyone got any? The POV-pushing tone could do with work too, courtesy said references - David Gerard 00:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've seen it in The New York Times, although I don't have a link to a specific article handy. 216.214.103.34 18:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wordspy lists the earliest known appearance of this phrase to The Sydney Morning Herald in January 1991. Additional googling indicates that it's in reasonably wide circulation. Feco 02:35, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

wiktionary lists it as well, as a real word not a neologism, though the article has had only two editors, the first of which was just an IP and the second of which appears to have just gussied it with a presumption of its existence's justification so i'm not sure it would bear a request for deletion there. -Ozzyslovechild 7 July 2005 04:42 (UTC)

Its a good term, quite popular here in the UK more so i think, ill do my best to find a quote - br

References

BANANA is mentioned here, going back to a reference in the Seattle Times in April 10, 1992 (can anyone find this article?): [1]

And in the Seattle Times August 23, 2003: [2]

I think it's pretty clear that the term has been around for a while, even if it is rarely used.

Merge or redirect

I've removed the Prod tag that was added today, because:

It would be better to either merge&redirect this article to NIMBY, or softredirect it to wikt:BANANA, (or do something else). I'm not sure which. Thoughts? -- Quiddity (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge with NIMBY first choice, or redirect to wikt second. I was about to prod it as nn, glad I saw this first. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. I redirected this page to the disambig page, to save having to add a hatnote at NIMBY. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)