Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VfD-Maled

British slang dic.def (at best) --bodnotbod 16:17, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * I personally know far too many mal 'eds to let this term go unrecognised by wikipedia. Now when I use the term mal 'ed and somebody does not understand me they can look here for verification of the correct usage of the phrase. -- Benjamin Neshwaritestavine Levy Bread
 * It may seem ridiculous to you. but as a manchester person i have heard this word and it is now common culture to use it.
 * Spend 15 minutes in Manchester without hearing the term mal 'ed. I dares ya
 * I believe you. However, it belongs in The Urban Dictionary not an encyclopaedia.  You wouldn't get the Britannica and expect to see an entry for pikey, chav, or bling-bling now, would you? --bodnotbod 16:39, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * you wouldnt expect to see spangle in an encyclopedia either though, would you? what were you thinking, you urbis quim
 * That's true. You can put it up for deletion if you like  ;o)  You've got me there.  Don't blow it, you could be a useful person to have around.  But if you go too bonkers they'll just block you. --bodnotbod 16:55, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * scallys in there why isnt pikey nedned chav or mal ed. how predjudice is that website and dont associate us with scallys
 * Scally is there, because you put it there. Everything you do is recorded.  All the changes you are making are being reverted.  It is quite futile.  You could have enjoyed yourself here.  But you've gone a bit potty.  Oh, well.  Shame. --bodnotbod 17:21, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Articles that can have an encylopedia page written on them can stay. Dictionary definitions cannot. we have a sister project called wictionary for those. i hope this clears things uptheresa knott 17:00, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a good point. Just because a page is listed here, doesn't mean it WILL get deleted.  It's a vote. --bodnotbod 16:57, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what it's trying to say. Delete -- Cyrius|&#9998 17:10, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. We need this dicdef about as much as we need a kick in the orchestras. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:58, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * I can definitely see scope for an entry on chavs and/or pikeys. Though we can argue about whether they're the same thing or not. Chavs are a definite English sociological phenomenon, if one that hasn't yet been adequately theorized. (IS THERE an entry for Chav???. Possibly scope for a definition of mal 'eds in that. I'd suggest an alternative etymology - a reference to the French 'mal educee' (badly educated, lower class, rude). And I can't believe I've spent two minutes of my life writing this. The Land 19:44, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Ugh. Who is "Maralyn Manson"? My point is this is a horrendously and childshly written article (as if we've never seen that before), BUT it may have value if redirected to a new (?) page on Mancastrian slang words. Keep for whatever time limit is normally established to have this thing done properly. After which, if it's not showing signs of improvement, pull the plug. Alcarillo 21:05, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Dicdef, and an obscure one at that. Delete. RadicalSubversiv E 08:08, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Im sorry i just thought young peoples views were in someway important it is not childish. but on the subject of childish all you people have come onto wikipedia jsut to complain about it?? please seize the day. grab a pro plus get off your rears and hmm i dont know??? leave the house?? 81.137.77.250 12:11, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Everybody's views are taken into account. Mal ed deserves to be documented somewhere, but that place is not here.  Some people have said it might have a home in [http:en.wiktionary.org the Wiktionary] and that sounds fair.  To see why Mal ed is up for deletion, see What Wikipedia is not (#2 under the first heading, and #2 under the second heading).  The article's authors did not help their case by systematically vandalising other pages once the article was listed here.  Had they not done so, they could have contributed other articles they felt were lacking.  Now, I bet - having written all that - I find that you weren't even referring to the Mal ed debate, but were just putting something at the bottom of the page related to something else entirely... --bodnotbod 14:34, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * delete, not an article --Jiang 04:34, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
 * delete. Maximus Rex 04:39, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
 * get your fanny out (15:41, May 9, 2004 by User:80.5.160.4)
 * You people suck, does it really matter if this entry stays or goes? You all need to take a break from sitting at your computers for days on end, trying to find fault with everything everyone else is doing, and go outside and taste some fresh air/read a book/plant a flower/watch some porn. I am very dissappointed in all of you, I hope you are happy... you've made me cry -Benjamin Neshwaritestavine Levy Bread (15:06, May 11, 2004; User:80.5.160.4)