Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White noise (slang)


 * 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 merge to White noise. Stifle (talk) 09:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

White noise (slang)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Wiktionary is there for that instead. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  01:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep This seems like an article which could use a better title rather than a topic which is outside the scope of wikipedia. White noise does have a social meaning different from the technical one in the main article, but it isn't informal in the way slang words normally are. Some sources suggest that white noise in the technical sense is just an application of the colloquial term to describe a stochastic process (see https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=white+noise+colloquial&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1651911113743&u=%23p%3DkMRnW-O6lXQJ). The phenomenon/cultural understanding of "white noise" is one that has been written about and likely predates the topic of the main white noise article. I would say this topic merits explanations and context a simple dictionary can't offer. --Middle river exports (talk) 08:16, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you have a specific suggestion for a better title? ~Kvng (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge to white noise. There are very common non-technical meanings for which there are sufficient sources out there to merit including in the main article. Doesn't seem like it needs a stand-alone article, though. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 13:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge per seems appropriate here. Bearian (talk) 20:16, 31 May 2022 (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.