The result was undecided so keep. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is an article on a minor expression. Anything of substance should be covered in an article on, maybe, "Pentecostal worship" or something like that. Jaque Hammer ( talk) 16:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
And if you'd actually looked at your Google Scholar search results, to see what is actually turned up by such a search, rather than doing pointless counting of meaningless hit numbers, you'd have known that, since they all have nouns after the adjectives (qualifying a fairly wide range of things from "happy-clappy chappy" to "happy-clappy Negroes" and not agreeing upon let alone denoting a single coherent concept). Counting search engine hits is not research. One has to pull one's finger out and read what the search engines find for one. Uncle G ( talk) 00:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was undecided so keep. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is an article on a minor expression. Anything of substance should be covered in an article on, maybe, "Pentecostal worship" or something like that. Jaque Hammer ( talk) 16:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
And if you'd actually looked at your Google Scholar search results, to see what is actually turned up by such a search, rather than doing pointless counting of meaningless hit numbers, you'd have known that, since they all have nouns after the adjectives (qualifying a fairly wide range of things from "happy-clappy chappy" to "happy-clappy Negroes" and not agreeing upon let alone denoting a single coherent concept). Counting search engine hits is not research. One has to pull one's finger out and read what the search engines find for one. Uncle G ( talk) 00:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply