Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ungqingili


 * 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   delete. Courcelles 05:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ungqingili

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. It is about the word (in Zulu) not about the people denoted by the word. Jaque Hammer (talk) 06:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom Spiderone  16:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  —Arxiloxos (talk) 21:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. The current version of the article only barely hints at it, but there is some indication that this word might be a notable one, and that there's enough sources to justify an article about its history and significance. Its notoriety (in South African English, at least) appears to derive from a controversial use by Jacob Zuma in a 2006 speech, criticizing same-sex marriage.  Evidently this led to significant controversy, and coverage that seems to have continued.  References turn up at Google News, Google Books, and Google Scholar.  I would be interested, in particular, in opinions from editors with South African expertise, as to whether there's enough out there to support this article as part of Category:Pejorative terms for people and/or Category:Zulu words and phrases.--Arxiloxos (talk) 21:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Admrboltz (talk) 17:43, 3 January 2011 (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.