Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowd Linguistics: Rugby


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Crowd Linguistics: Rugby

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A page full of unsourced and unreferenced slang created as a response to this successful AfD. Prod removed by author. JuJube 18:18, 27 April 2007 (UT

Look this is getting ridiculous you can check any of these words on the internet they are not false, so what if it is not referenced! I was told if i retitled it and added more information then it would stay at the end of the last AfD! There is no reason why this cannot be on wikipedia! Check these words yourself before syaing it is false! Headsworth 19:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, even when that information is true and attributable to reliable sources. In the last AFD, I told you It wasn't your fault that it was misnamed, it was the fault of the person who made that request. Nevertheless, while we appreciate your efforts to fulfill that request, editors here are arguing that the topic is not needed. In many cases it is permissible to create a stub article for a notable topic that may grow in time, but in this case we probably don't need a local slang directory pertaining to a specific sport. Other editors did suggest a rename if the article were kept. The name was not a reason for deletion. --Dhartung | Talk 02:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as being unsourced, and thus original research. If sources are provided, the question will then become one of the encyclopedic nature of the topic. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Someguy1221 23:50, 28 April 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.