Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aussie cheer


 * 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 Keep closed as keep given that besides the nomination there was other recommendations for delete. There is a significant suggestion of merging both or possibly renaming. Its something that should be discussed and decided on the articles talk page. Gnangarra 01:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Aussie cheer

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod, notability issues. Peta 05:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC) Aussie chant? Australian sporting chant? Anything apart from "Aussie cheer". Yuk! Ozzieboy 17:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep get mentioned peripherally quite often in discussions of Australian nationalism. I added a couple of sources; it's hard to find many facts in reliable sources that are actually about the phrase (e.g. how it originated, etc.). cab 08:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   cab 08:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, referenced and it fulfils notability criteria. Recurring dreams 08:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; lots of sources. John Vandenberg 08:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep suitable level of news coverage going back to 2000 - notable and verifiable. Orderinchaos 09:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Has previously been addressed in the Aussie article. Is the title "Aussie cheer" a neologism?--Melburnian 09:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Consider merging content from Aussie to this article? Recurring dreams 09:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, Keep, merge section from Aussie, and move article to Aussie Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi--Melburnian 10:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, Merge chant section from Aussie, but perhaps with a better article title than "Aussie Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi"!
 * Merge to Oggy Oggy Oggy as a minor variation from the original theme with not enough content to justify an spinout article on its own. -- Mattinbgn/talk 09:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as a stand alone article (needs some rewriting but does meet inclusion under WP:NN-- VS talk 10:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with Oggy Oggy Oggy per Mattinbgn. BTLizard 11:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge. Agree with Mattinbgn.Assize 13:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with Oggy Oggy Oggy per Mattinbgn. Thinly referenced. One article about someone trying to copyright it (which makes little sense in terms of intellectual property law) and another article where it gets a brief mention in the context of Aussie nationalism. Edison 14:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Orderinchaos, Also it is better sourced than Oggy Oggy Oggy and most likely more widely used in modern usage. DXRAW 21:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sourced article on well-known Australian chant. If it was to be merged, Oggy Oggy Oggy should be merged into this rather than vice versa. Capitalistroadster 02:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Agreed that moving the article to a more appropriaste title, such as Melburnian's suggestion, would be advisable. "Aussie cheer" is pretty generic and meaningless :) Orderinchaos 12:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - the article is verified; and there should be enough for a shortish article on this subject - what about the use of the chant during the Sydney 2000 Olympics, for example? Merging to the English chant article would fail to recognise the distinctly Australian thing that this chant has become. JRG 23:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is estabilished and it is better referenced than Oggy Oggy Oggy which is only referenced to a dictionary (ie a directory listing).Garrie 03:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability established as far as I'm concerned. It's an entirely different thing, with different connotations, than Oggy Oggy Oggy.  Lankiveil 23:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC).
 * 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.