Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kangaroo court


 * 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. Snow close. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 16:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Kangaroo court

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This article is about a pejorative term rather than an encyclopedic topic. There are no sources to improve the article and it is just original research. TFD (talk) 05:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. This describes a concept rather than a term and there are enough sources available with which to improve this and leave something that goes beyond a dictionary definition, e.g., , , , .--Michig (talk) 08:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Your sources are either dictionaries or glossaries, or ideosyncatic uses of the term. In other words the article cannot be expanded beyond a dictionary definition.  TFD (talk) 18:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, not really. Most of those sources go beyond a dictionary definition, so we can too.--Michig (talk) 18:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * These are by no means the only sources available. West's Encyclopedia of American Law has a 325-word entry for Kangaroo Court, for instance.--Michig (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Here is a link to the article in West's Encyclopedia. It says nothing beyond what a good dictionary would say.  Incidentally, all these sources are tertiary sources.  Can you provide any secondary sources?  TFD (talk) 22:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, essentially per Michig. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Michig. James500 (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Michig. --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, significant coverage in numerous reliable secondary sources. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2012 (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.