Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eurotrash (term)


 * 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 and Cleanup, so tagged. Keeper  |   76   |   Disclaimer  18:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Eurotrash (term)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:WINAD is an official policy, and this article violates it heavily, along with violating WP:NOR to the extreme. Already exists in Wiktionary. Eurotrash is fine as a disambig page with a wiktionary link, this does not need its own article. Correct me if I'm wrong... h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 03:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Already on Wiktionary no need for it here. Sting au  Buzz Me...   04:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - almost anything quatified as term belongs on wiktionary, and this is mostly WP:OR anyhow --T-rex 06:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously, though unsourced and partly unencyclopedic, this is more than just a definition of a cultural term that has been prevalent for over two decades. It's easily sourced (it seems to need a definition published somewhere, around the time tourist season starts wherever the publication is). We have the NYT with a substantial definition as well. (It's also clearly a term that Europeans use, too, not just an American stereotype _of_ Europeans.) --Dhartung | Talk 12:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Sounds like an argument to Transwiki to Wiktionary, to me. Looking at this word's entry there, part of this article does seem to refer to a definition that is not listed there. --Darkprincealain (talk) 13:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The very first criterion in WINAD:Encyclopedia vs. dictionary articles says that encyclopedic articles are "are about the people, concepts, places, events, and things that their titles denote". Is there some other article about this topic that the term Eurotrash denotes? It certainly isn't a synonym for European. --Dhartung | Talk 22:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The term is not a neologism, its use to pretty wide spread and well established, and the article seeks to establish how it was created and popularized. These sections cannot be transwikied to the full extent that they need, and as such the article should be kept. As an aside, the Sacha Baron Cohen character of Bruno is a good example of Eurotrash with regards toward their fashion and culture aesthetics, and can be cited as a prominent fictitious example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zidel333 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If you can demonstrate that it is improvable without going into original research, by all means do it. An alternative is to include it in list of ethnic slurs, if that's appropriate.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 17:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Very widespread use as a word, and its application and the development of the meaning is encyclopedic. DGG (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable per Google hits and scholar/books: Certainly enough to edit a decent article out of (although the current one is indeed in a poor uncited OR condition and needs to be revamped). &mdash;  EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 06:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This article is a valid topic, because "Eurotrash" is a frequently used pejorative term and deserving of more than a mere dictionary entry. However, the current version needs to be greatly overhauled. 68.101.130.214 (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - dictionary definition, as shown by title -Halo (talk) 17:23, 3 February 2008 (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.