Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walk-off (Parking)


 * 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. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Walk-off (Parking)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable, unecyclopaedic. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete completely unsourced neologism. Possibly a made up term. Wikipedia is not for things made up one day -- neon white talk 22:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep It's notable, albeit a recent neologism, but it's encyclopedic as a newly-emerged term related to town and retail planning. It's certainly not made up for this article, as evidenced by the images and the text on the signs. With some expansion, particularly on measures taken by mall operators to avoid walk-off, then I think this could become an interesting article. There's an interesting UK civil liberties tie-in where some very heavy-handed CCTV surveillance is being used to crack this rather trivial problem.


 * Article text is obviously poor, but that's an improvement not a deletion. As the subject is already verified by the term's usage on the illustrated signs, I'd say that the article is already sufficient to be a keeper. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Recent neologisms are not appropriate for an encyclopedia. See WP:NEO. The article simply doesnt assert any kind of notability. -- neon white talk 04:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Then re-read WP:NEO. Using neologisms is frowned upon, as they're unclear. Explaining recent (not new) neologisms is valuable. "walk-off" is a concept that's real, notable and significant in modern retail management. What we need here is a better article, and one contrasting what appears to be difference in UK / US attitudes to how it should be handled.
 * What's needed is some sources that prove it's notability. It seems like OR to me. -- neon white talk 02:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sources convey verifiability, not notability. I'm happy that the concept is notable (perhaps not clearly so, perhaps not verifiably so, as yet). Now IMHO, photographs of real parking signs are an acceptable primary source for verification.
 * I'd note though that the phrase itself is an Americanism, so that although the concept is notable in the UK too, the same term isn't used (which isn't a probelm anyway, it's the concept's notability that's important - we're an encyclopedia, not a dictionary). Andy Dingley (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete or Transwiki to wictionary. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - while the phrase appears in a picture of a "homemade" sign, there is no evidence of its being used in any reliable source. B.Wind (talk) 05:12, 9 July 2008 (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.