Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Newspeak words


 * 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. Clearly no consensus to delete. Discussion about whether or not to merge can continue on the article's talk page.  A  Train talk 10:49, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

List of Newspeak words

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. w umbolo  ^^^  14:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. cinco deL3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. cinco deL3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. cinco deL3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete List cruft cinco deL3X1 ◊distænt write◊  16:46, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge I think some of the words that have entered normal everyday language (eg the bluelinked ones) might be better listed at something like Nineteen Eighty-Four in popular media (though that itself should be "Nineteen Eighty-Four in popular culture"), but this as a separate list is unnecessary. --M asem (t) 16:48, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * We already have Newspeak, and all the "blue-linked" words actually redirect to that section. w umbolo   ^^^  16:58, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hrm, that all seems primary-sourced words (though I'm sure effort can be made to support a few of Newspeak's terms via secondary sources). If all those bluelinks in this redirect there, then a merge is not needed and deletion is appropriate. --M asem (t) 17:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:NOTDICT. Redirect to Newspeak if necessary. Ajf773 (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep The page gets 600+ views daily, clearly it is of importance to many people and shouldn't be thrown under the bus so hastily. Additionally, Wiktionary is not a Newspeak dictionary, it's an English dictionary (and other actual languages). A listing of Newspeak words would be of value to people as it would otherwise not be organized in a list format with all the words together. It could use more references, but it is potentially of encyclopedic value.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge with Newspeak--Jaldous1 (talk) 23:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep to help readers differentiate between canonical 1984 words and commonly misattributed terms (e.g.groupthink). ―cobaltcigs 17:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Newspeak, keeping only the bluelinks and items that can be sourced to secondary sources as significant. Wikipedia is otherwise not a directory of vocabulary. The words can also be referenced in other 1984-related articles, but that need not have any relation to the list. The "misattributed terms" section of the list is original research and should be removed unless sources say those terms are indeed often misattributed. (not watching, please )  czar  02:01, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Why Societies Need Dissent (2005), p. 140 and many other books state that groupthink was based on the word doublethink and intended to have an Orwellian connotation. It doesn't say they are commonly confused, but one could come to the conclusion that they are very likely to be confused by those who aren't aware what the actual Newspeak words are.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep the policy of WP:NOTDIC is being grossly misrepresented here. Actually, the nomination doesn't even try to explain how this article could supposedly fit in its interdictions. No, no, just drop a link to a random policy there, and boom&hellip; !! Kind regards, --Usien6 02:47, 24 May 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.