Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whoopsie daisy

Whoopsie daisy was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was ambiguous. After reviewing the votes and the relevant articles, I have made this a redirect to baby talk. This will at least be consistent with Wikipedia's treatment of other phrases such as the list of Latin phrases and military slang. Rossami 21:23, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nonsense. Funny, but nonsense. RickK 22:58, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * recently I have taken to saying "aw phuddi choot" in such circumstances. Merge with Upsidaisium and delete both. Ianb 23:06, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: More phuddi articles like this choot, which belongs in a dictionary, is just OOS.  Actually, it's a harmless dictdef, but it's a dictdef.  Geogre 23:51, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment Too short, but not patent nonsense and a legitimate piece of information which is not likely to be found in ordinary dictionaries, as it is basically baby talk. We do not seem to have an article on Baby talk. Baby-talk phrases are very odd in that there are many phrases that are in reasonably wide use&mdash;"whoopsie-daisy" is one of them&mdash;and others that are specific to a particular family. I guess I'm leaning toward "move and redirect to baby talk." If I can think of or find a few other widely used expressions I may actually do this. Dpbsmith 11:32, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * There are all sorts of infantile euphemisms. Even without getting into sexual euphemism for infants, there are all the scatological ones.  Then there are the nonsense syllables.  One could divide the article into inarticulate noises, the negative particle ("no," "no-no," "a doesn't," etc.), euphemism, which subdivides into scatology, anatomy, and interjections -- of which "whoopsie daisy" is one.  Such an article would be good, since ESL folks in particular will be puzzled by the phenomenon. Geogre 12:32, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Baby talk. I have created an article on Baby talk for this very purpose. I'm somewhat concerned because I don't have any expertise in linguistics or child development, and I fear that I may have mixed up two different uses of baby talk (nonverbal noises and "nursery" words), but I guess I will leave it to Wikipedians to clean up any boo-boos, whoopsie-daisies or, in general, Wiki-ickies I may have committed. There is far, far less on the Web about baby talk than I could possibly have imagined, unless I'm searching on the wrong things. Dpbsmith 14:29, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC) P.S. We need something like "superstub" to describe something that's longer than a stub but is still just a placeholder...
 * Good job on the Baby talk article, Dpbsmith. - Eisnel
 * I agree, good job. RickK 21:17, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)