Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pejorative


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Pejorative

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article appears to be a pretty clear cut contravention of WP:NOTADICTIONARY. The references used as citations are themselves dictionaries, and it looks like this article constitutes an extended dictionary entry. Should either be deleted or converted into some kind of a redirect to the Wiktionary project term. I also asked myself, "So, would a paper encyclopedia be likely have an entry on the word 'Pejorative'?" and found myself responding with, "No, probably not." You can't do a search under "news" or "newspapers" or "books" or "scholar" or "JSTOR" for it either— all of which points to it fundamentally being a dictionary entry, not an encyclopedia one. KDS 4444 Talk  06:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - needs to be improved but notable term —Мандичка YO 😜 08:47, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:ASSERTN: a mere assertion of notability is not evidence of notability. The word "melioration", which occurs in the second paragraph, looks like a word with a social history and a cultural context around its usage.  That is the kind of word that Wikipedia should treat as an exception to its "not a dictionary" policy.  I do not disagree that "pejorative" is a notable term.  So are the terms "nice", "interesting", "some", "before", and "through".  Where would English be without them?  My point is that Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia— and this can mean there are sometimes articles on terms like truthiness and Macedonia (terminology), but not all words are de facto encyclopedic.  "Pejorative" is not a grammatical mood like the word "jussive" or "imperative", it is only a routine adjective with no other "meat" to it.  "List of pejorative terms" might be interesting as an article!  And it would have references beyond just dictionaries.  But "pejorative"?  Are there any English words that are not notable?  KDS 4444  Talk  14:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The scholar link above contains several promising citations such as Semantic change and componential analysis: an inquiry into pejorative developments in English; Pejorative sense development in English; Pejorative terms for midwest farmers (!); On the syntactic expression of pejorative mood. Andrew D. (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andrew. Ideas for expansion include linguistic reclamation ("A queer revolution: Reconceptualizing the debate over linguistic reclamation" among others), attempts to avoid pejoratives in various linguistic endeavours (i.e. like "Can a less pejorative Chinese translation for schizophrenia reduce stigma? A study of adolescents’ attitudes toward people with schizophrenia"), and how a word becomes pejorative, like in "It befalls words to fall down: pejoration as a type of semantic change"). There's also this, but I can't make heads or tails of that abstract. On a side note, should pejoration redirect to pejorative? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I believe this is an example of WP:WORDISSUBJECT. Not that these are shining examples but the World Heritage Encyclopedia has an article on the word pejorative and the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy has an article about "pejorative language'. I would be favour of moving it to 'derogatory language' as well. According to WP:NOUN as pointed out, it was previously at "derogatory term" which did not meet the policy criteria. I have started a requested move discussion.  Mkdw talk 05:23, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Notes


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 10 July 2015 (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.