Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dink

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep with a strong recommendation to make into a redirect. Rossami (talk) 07:17, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dink
I don't quite know if this qualifies as a dictdef, but it certainly is not deserving of an article on its own. If it is genuine, then it could be merged (if appropriate) with military slang.

Incidentally, this article appeared before about a different topic. There is a VfD discussion of it there at Votes for deletion/Dink/Old discussion Smoddy | Talk 10:45, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with List of ethnic slurs. Note that that page is under protection and put up for deletion, but that is secondary to this discussion (if it goes, this goes). And Wikipedia is not a slang dictionary, but see, which is probably even more obscure. JRM 11:15, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. --fvw *  14:29, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. If List of ethnic slurs is deleted then this should be too. Rje 16:06, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. User has already deleted the vfd notice, so don't be suprised if it comes up again. Cmprince 16:21, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect is an admirable solution. Btw, the only recent way I have heard this term is as an acronym for "dual income no kids" (which does not need an article) Antandrus 16:31, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Check the edit history; someone did add that definition, but after the original poster deleted the vfd notice. But I'm not sure either definition needs its own article. Dink1 can go to list of ethnic slurs and Dink2 can go to list of acronyms. Whether a disambiguation page needs to remain I leave as an exercise for the reader. Cmprince 17:33, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Reidrect only: I've heard it both as a slur and as DINK.  IMO, they're both dictdefs and not appropriate.  However, given the presence of the slurs list, it can go there.  I just don't think it's worth putting in the merge queue.  It's used about as often, in my experience, as "gook," which is to say not very often at all.  Geogre 22:10, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. I initiated the article. I would agree with a merge and redirect to military slang, if people dont believe it deserves its own article.  I do not think that it deserves to be snuffed out of existence however.  Nor do I feel that it should only go to a list of ethnic slurs page, considering I have only ever heard it used within the context of the war in Vietnam.  Sorry removing the notice.  It seemed like people still thought this was in reference to that (british?) television thing.  I tried to clarify in the discussion for the article.  I will leave it alone until the issue is resolved.  As for "dual income no kids", I think that is probably too contemporary to have mention here, and is more of "urban dictionary" type of article. --63.172.33.194 18:42, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thank you for your courtesy, and please don't let this VfD listing discourage you. Specifically, I believe, "dink" was used in the Vietnam War and has been reused since, though inaccurately.  It could certainly be in military slang in a section on "the enemy," but the term has spread, unfortunately, into civilian (and, of course, teen) use for Asians and then for "dinky" (i.e. small genital) persons.  That's why it could go to the ethnic slurs page, too.  I agree that it really ought not be confused with the Yuppy/Buppy type of descriptor, since that should be DINK and never "Dink" or "dink."  Geogre 05:06, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as disambig. There was also a children's cartoon in the 1980s called "Dink the Little Dinosaur", believe it or not.  -Sean Curtin 06:03, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are 27 entries for dink in the UrbanDictionary. And that is the appropriate place for it. There is no special reason why the vietnam application should be regarded as more important than any of the others. -- mikeL

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.