Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Do the needful


 * 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 redirect to Indian English. J04n(talk page) 13:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Do the needful

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article consists mostly of original research, and the subject doesn't really have enough coverage to be notable. The only linked source doesn't help either. It might be good enough as a dictionary entry, but it's hardly appropriate for an encyclopedia. Smtchahal (talk) 16:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Transwiki to wiktionary - this currently is a dictdef of an idiom, and nothing more. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 16:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Based on Andrew D's sources, I think there may be enough for an article, or at least a redirect to Indian English. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 22:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Apparently "Transwiki" isn't a thing at all anymore. Switching vote to Redirect. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 17:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Transwiki to wiktionary, per Power~enwiki. It is clearly a dictionary definition. Prince of Thieves (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep There's plenty of coverage, if you look for it, including the following. It therefore passes WP:WORDISSUBJECT. Andrew D. (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Don’t prepone it – do the needful. in The Guardian
 * 10 classic Indianisms at CNN
 * Doing the Needful in the New York Times
 * Those are all articles defining it. How it is not a dictionary term then? Natureium (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:DICDEF which explains our policy and difference between dictionary entries and encyclopedia articles. Definition is not a difference because "Both dictionaries and encyclopedias contain definitions". Andrew D. (talk) 23:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Andrew, as usual you have either misunderstood or are deliberately misrepresenting the policy, which reads such articles must go beyond what would be found in a dictionary entry (definition, pronunciation, etymology, use information, etc.) Nothing currently in the article falls outside these dictionaric parameters, despite your strawman argument here that it is everyone except you that is misunderstanding the policy excluding stub articles that define a word or phrase. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Andrew, as usual you have either misunderstood or are deliberately misrepresenting the policy, which reads such articles must go beyond what would be found in a dictionary entry (definition, pronunciation, etymology, use information, etc.) Nothing currently in the article falls outside these dictionaric parameters, despite your strawman argument here that it is everyone except you that is misunderstanding the policy excluding stub articles that define a word or phrase. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Transwiki Redirect- Per Andrew D., whose sources help confirm this is noting more than a dictionary term.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:54, 13 March 2018 (UTC) Changing: according to Ansh, transwiki is a bad option. Power~wiki has offered an alternative that I can support.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you aware that Transwiki means ''Delete and move to wiktionary? Prince of Thieves (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Curious about the removed content. Does anyone have access to the paysite of Oxford dictionary?  Can you confirm the information is somewhere on there?  I'm not sure if this could be expanded into an article or not, instead of just a dictionary entry.   D r e a m Focus  21:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The paysite has no more informtion than what you can freely read here: Prince of Thieves (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Prince of Thieves is quite mistaken. The full OED has an extensive entry for the word needful.  When used as a noun, it provides 4 different sense for the word:
 * Needful people – the needy
 * As "needfuls" meaning necessities
 * As "the needful", especially in the phrase "to do the needful", meaning that which is necessary
 * The cash or money required for something
 * It gives many examples of usage but few of them seem to relate to the modern Indian English usage. The closest seems to be from 1929, "The conspirators at Delhi..sent orders..‘to look out and do the needful at once’."  I don't think that source helps us much with the main point of the article which is about the way that this phrase is so characteristic of modern Indian English as a separate dialect.  I am myself very familiar with this and it's part of a small set of words which tend to stand out when used to communicate with UK or US speakers.  The sources I provide above explain this in detail.  What we really need is some equivalent of Comparison of American and British English and the page in question would be a start in building this. Andrew D. (talk) 22:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * It seems it is well used in Indian English. See below. Prince of Thieves (talk) 23:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - Transwiki is a deprecated process - wiktionary and other projects understandably don't want our crap. ansh 666 17:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't keep I'm not familiar with transwiki and for all I know Ansh's comment just above could be right. But clearly NOTDIC applies, since even if it is not just a definition it currently contains nothing but linguistic information on etymology, usage, etc. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment (nominator's note) From what I can see in the discussion, there is coverage, but still not enough to justify a Wikipedia article. Maybe it could be mentioned in a section in Indian English or somewhere similar, but any claims of encyclopedic significance made in the article (including outlandish ones like use of the phrase in the context of "globalized call centers") that could've been reasons to keep it are not significantly covered in any of the mentioned sources. Smtchahal (talk) 06:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Dear Closing Editor, Kindly do the needful and close this discussion as delete. A familiar phrase in common use 200 years ago in English (ngram here:, lingered in India.  A familiar pattern, many words and phrases linger only in remote corners of the Empire.  (In England, they still say "reckon" where proper Americans say "calculate" ;) .  Anyone who wants to put it in a dictionary somewhere should feel free - but it is not a proper subject for an encyclopedia.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment to those wanting to transwiki this page, do the needful already exists on Wiktionary. SpinningSpark 12:07, 21 March 2018 (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.