Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smirting (2nd 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   keep.  MBisanz  talk 10:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Smirting
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non notable neologism that seems to have fallen out of popular use since smoking bans are not a new thing anymore. Whargarbl (talk) 12:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - No references. Google search brings up news articles at least 2, if not more, years old. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 13:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - It has been rewritten and a lot of references added. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 17:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Classic transient neologism - at best a dicdef. Tevildo (talk) 14:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism as per nom. Eddie.willers (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  16:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, pending the outcome of the current re-write. The page appears to be undergoing a major edit. Cnilep (talk) 17:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I just finished sourcing the article with multiple reliable sources that establish "smirting" as a notable phenomenon. The sources have in-depth (significant to exclusive) coverage of the phenomenon and term, rather than simply using the term "smirting".  I added eleven sources (The Guardian, BBC, Chicago Tribune, Daily Mail, a couple of books, etc). If you want more, there are plenty to be had on Gnews, Gbooks, and Gscholar. I would also add that notabilty is not temporary. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  17:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable and well-sourced thanks to L@L's work. Aside: if possible, it would be nice to have a pronunciation guide to the "smlirting" variant.  LadyofShalott  Weave  18:21, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I stand by my original opinion, references notwitstanding.  There's no dispute that the term was used in the media a few years ago.  Can this article ever be anything more than a definition of the term?  Is it actually part of popular culture, rather than a clever portmanteau word made up by a journalist?  I think not.  Tevildo (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Answer - In my opinion, the article is already a bit more than a dictionary definition, and given the number of sources available on the net (see my comment above), I don't see why it can't be expanded some more. Remember, an encyclopedic stub usually strongly resembles a dictionary definition when it first starts out. The sources provided in the article demonstrate that both the term and the phenomenon are Wikipedia notable, regardless of the origin of the word.  If the word has fallen into disuse, that does not affect its notability for Wikipedia's purposes, as notability is not temporary. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note - I just expanded and reorganized the article a bit more. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability has been established by the long list of RS in the article. -- J mundo 02:11, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable phenomenon. Worse case is that it would be merged but there seem to be too many possible targets. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:09, 19 April 2009 (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.