Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slang terms for money


 * 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) CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:26, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Slang terms for money

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOT..a dictionary. This article, by its nature, is a needless catchall for OR, speculation, and neologisms. Anmccaff (talk) 00:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

You've asked for comments about the fact this article is on the list for deletion. I've got to ask why is it on the list? I found it useful, informative and even if many citations were missing, it still gave me the information I needed. A lot of work has apparently gone into this article; it's not offensive; it is not defamatory; it seems to me to be the sort of article that Wikipedia is famous for. It is not, IMHO, a "needless catchall" and doesn't contain that many neologisms as many of the terms being quoted go back decades. I hope Wikipedia doesn't become auto-censoring because a tiny minority disagrees with the purity of the article! User:Aresby —Preceding undated comment added 17:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and merge in List of alternative names for currency. This is a reasonable topic for further investigation beyond just listing the terms - see The Guardian, Crossword roundup: dosh, dosh, loadsamoney, The Telegraph, Mapped: The UK's favourite slang words (both mentioning money-themed slang). bd2412  T 21:04, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. I find it hard to believe this list is in AfD. First, this is not WP:OR, because Original research means the term has not been used by secondary independent source; while for this found in multiple reliable sources ABC, UK's Guardian and Daily Writing. These sources also cancel 'speculation' claim as The Guardian and ABC don't report unfounded 'speculation'. This is not dictionary entry because it's legitimate list article of notable concepts per WP:LISTPURP and  not neologism, because neologism has received no coverage in independent sources while this list is sourced, and verifiable. Here are more sources besides the one above and those in the article here, here, here, this one and |title=etymologiebank.nl this. The article is certainly notable though I agree it need some cleanup, but deletion is not that cleanup and WP:BEFORE is very important step before AfDing. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:20, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep but merge with List of alternative names for currency. The two articles are on basically the same topic; while both need improvement the one listed here is better.  There should be more than enough non-DICTDEF content to have an article here. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 05:03, 5 December 2017 (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.