User talk:Nigelsade

Welcome!

Hello, Nigelsade, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Gihugic, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Half Shadow  21:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Gihugic


Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Gihugic, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Half Shadow  21:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Articles should not be created that just define a word. If a word has a significant usage history (for example, has evolved over time) and if that history is documented by multiple reliable sources, then the word might be a candidate for an article, but such words are few and far between. —C.Fred (talk) 21:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

From Nigel Sade This word does have a history that was in part explained on the page you failed to read ... It is an evolution of words and ussage in coloquial vernacular. I think I said this 3 times both in the post and in the retort on the talk page. or maybe I am using this thing wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nighelsade (talk • contribs)


 * There were no reliable sources cited, only links to Urban Dictionary and other online sites. What newspaper or magazine articles have been written about the evolution of the word? —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Give it 2 days and it will be on Websters and I can offer things from my website, but as it is a living word and part of an ever growing community of users the relationship to previous words and how it became a commonly used word seemed pretty self explanatory. But I could add the obvious connections and citations from my website (I am a professional artist, who uses the word regularly. My fans and the community at large would gladly push for the addition to your publication.


 * Even if it's in Webster's—and is it really due for a new edition within the next two days?—that won't be enough. Lots of words are in the dictionary; very few articles on Wikipedia are about the words. As for anything from your website, that would fall within the realm of original research and not count as a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 23:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

WOW this exchange make me lose a great deal of respect for Wikipedia ... is there any one else I can talk to? As far as the new edition stab ... there is this clever thing call the internet that allows updates all the time ... maybe I could talk with your supervisor instead? Nigelsade (talk) 21:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)nigelsade