Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ah Lian (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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 no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Ah Lian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Besides that the article is uncited and seems a bit (or more than just a bit) unencyclopedic in tone. Looking at the previous AfD it seems to me that the result should have been "delete" not "no consensus" based on the arguments presented. Jaque Hammer (talk) 14:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or redirect to Wikitionary, rather than being its own full encyclopedia article. As per WP:CITE, the sources are from non academic dictionaries and does not really meet the WP:V sources.--Takamaxa (Talk) 12:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: a cursory look for sources shows that this term is widely used, and often referred to. I found a discussion in an academic work in less than two minutes. Deletion should be a last resort, fix things first. Francis Bond (talk) 14:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not within the scope of an encyclopaedic article, definitions and examples are Wikitionary criteria. Valid, but not here. Jørdan 08:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The first time that this came up at AFD, back in 2005, I observed that no documentation of this stereotype had been presented. Well done to Ffbond for finding the article by Chua Beng Huat. However, I observe that Chua makes no distinction between male and female, covering the both as one. This, as well as the copy-and-paste-but-change-the-gender nature of the two articles, indicate that this and ah beng really belong merged together, as a single topic. The deletion tool is not required to achieve that goal, however. Uncle G (talk) 00:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This and the male equivalent seem from the articles to be distinct stereotypes, not just gendered versions of each other, so I wouldn't merge. But I think we need to rewrite this article to indicate that it's about a stereotype, not about reality. DGG ( talk ) 04:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge with Ah Beng since they are very similar in nature. Perhaps a rename article as Singaporean stereotypes. Ah lian and Ah beng go hand in hand, and deleting one will make no sense. Terence (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.