Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vulgarism


 * 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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Vulgarism

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested WP:PROD; Unsourced, and has been for getting on for three years. Unless the sociological analysis can be expanded to make this a worthy topic, this article should be deleted and any worthwhile content transwikied to Wiktionary. If the contesting editor feels that this article can be any better than the Wktionary version, then it's open to improvement. Rodhull andemu  02:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Article seems to be on a well known topic which is distinct from other articles, after editing it does not constitute a dictionary definition, as it is on a single well known topic, it is likely to be easy to reference. The topic is notable, but clearly needs expansion; it is simply a stub at present. It does not violate any known policy.- Wolfkeeper  02:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Edit into Decorum. A vulgarism is simply a breach of literary decorum, a subject with a millennia-long history that is worth better treatment than Wikipedia is currently giving it. --Wetman (talk) 07:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a stub, it needs expansion, but it's certainly a topic worthy of an encyclopedia article. What we currently have isn't great, but it's better than a redirect to "decorum" or a red link. +Angr 10:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Angr, WP:OUTCOMES - most such articles are kept. WP:BLP does not apply. Decorum is not the same, so a redirect would confuse high school and college students. Bearian (talk) 14:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge with Profanity. I don't see any source which would justify it being separate. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:03, 25 March 2010 (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.