Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jargon of The Rush Limbaugh Show (3rd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus. AfD not needed to merge, but consensus for a merge not evident here either. W.marsh 22:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Jargon of The Rush Limbaugh Show

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Previous AfD: Articles for deletion/Jargon of The Rush Limbaugh Show

This article does not assert the notability of the jargon. The discussion of the terms themselves is all original research. Only a couple of the terms are sourced, leaving it unverifiable. Nor is it likely that we'd be able to source either the terms or their meaning. Wikipedia is not a collection of words or definitions. Since the article appears to irreparably violate WP:NOR and WP:V, I propose that we delete it. -Will Beback · † · 23:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge to Rush Limbaugh or The Rush Limbaugh Show. We do not need this many article on one person. Wooyi 00:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per results of previous AfD. Nom is based mainly upon WP:NOR and WP:V, both of which were refuted in the last AfD. Wooyi's argument is not based on any Wikipedia policy. dhett (talk • contribs) 02:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you sure about that? I expected the article to mostly feature well-known terms ("dittohead", "feminazi", "al-[media]") sometimes cited in newspaper articles on the program, but I think a lot of this stuff could have no reliable third-party source and easily qualifies as Rushcruft. Some of it seems to be article humour too. See the entry for "Long-haired, maggot-infested, phony-baloney, plastic-banana, good time rock and roll, FM types". That said, keep for the notability of those terms that are actually notable. Cool Hand Luke 02:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * "Dittohead", "Feminazi", and other notable terms already have articles of their own. We also have List of political epithets that includes some more notable terms. I assume the only way to establish notability is the availability of 3rd-party references that mention the terms. How many of them on the article meet that test? Few to none, as far as I can tell. If we cut it down to the outside-sourced material well have about two entries, both for terms he calls himself. -Will Beback · † · 06:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think it would be better to merge those terms here. There should be a much tighter list, but they'll be independantly verified with more explaination than the current pseudo-dictionary. Cool Hand Luke 03:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. An argument may be made that the article uses neologisms, but the very source themselves can be found in transcripts to the show and, as such, can be linked directly to the show website itself, albeit much of it requiring a 24/7 membership. Further, merging would only create an extremely long show article. Beyond that, each entry is used (or was used, in case of some obsolete items) multiple times on the show, thus adding to their notoriety. Fwgoebel 14:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)]
 * Merge. Not just this article, but ALL articles linked to the Rush show that concern jargon ("Dittohead"), types of speech, the show's self-referential terms, etc. -- I think TWO articles on Mr. Limbaugh is enough given their size, and redirects to appropriate retained headings would suffice. Scattering bits and pieces makes the subject matter unwieldy. The subject has deserved notoriety in popular culture, but Wiki cannot be "all things to all readers". Suggested topic heading : "Jargon and terminology of Rush Limbaugh" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dfoofnik (talk • contribs).


 * Merge to Rush Limbaugh as per Wooyi. Brimba 22:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, per WP:NOT. Only a few of these terms are even worth merging into The Rush Limbaugh Show. Krimpet 06:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or Merge I think it should be merged under 'no jargon', and I would just say merge, expect that there is a lot of relevant content in this article and I can not see how to merge it into Rush Limbaugh gracefully. Normalphil 05:53, 5 February 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.