620:
which letters are the least used, and then using an entirely different source to come to a conclusion of the article creator's own design. Basically the very definition of synthesis). And then the article devolves into just pop culture cruft, before going completely off topic and talking about "funny numbers", which is a completely different topic. Most of the sources are not actual reliable, third party sources, since they're things like episodes of fiction TV series. In short, there are
322:- your focused definition of "substantive" would hold true in most articles, but in *this* article, the statements of comedians and comic characters can be legitimate sourcing, not just trivia as it would usually be. Those are people who make a living in the field, who study it and understand it. When H.L. Mencken says K words are funny that is at least as legitimate a source of information as a psychology professor's analysis. -
550:- This isn't "list of inherently funny words" - which would, indeed, be problematic - this is an article about a concept that is embraced and used and studied by comedians, writers and academics. It has 18 (at current count) references. It could be improved, certainly (like 98% of wikipedia) but it's a legitimate article topic. -
436:
Mencken's piece (and other writings of professional comics) IS a secondary source for this subject that establishes its importance, even though it is also humor writing; that's where you're missing the point (in my opinion, of course). Your idea of what constitutes a secondary source doesn't fit this
619:
weak. There are a few actual reliable sources here that actually do confirm that yes, its a notable topic. But about 3/4 of this article probably has to go, along with nearly all of the so-called "sources". A lot of the article is pure OR and
Synthesis (i.e. using Webster's dictionary to find out
387:
Virtually all references for psychology/sociology/culture topics could be dismissed as mere "opinion", even if published in a journal. I think you're being a bit academic-source-blinkered not to recognize how the practices of professionals in the field (humor writing), reflected in their statements,
342:, articles should be based on "third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Fictional characters meet none of these criteria. Assembling a collection of utterances by unrelated people or characters and using them to prove a separate point is
288:
humor) as "a quantifiable function of how far NWs are from being words". The entire concept of "inherently funny words" is therefore based on a misinterpretation of the source material. Some of the article contents could be merged into the articles
218:
109:
104:
99:
515:, only in passing, by way of explaining "the fate or ill fame of Podunk as a nest of the socially starved and intellectually underprivileged" and "an accepted symbol for bucolic coma". He appears to mean
115:
94:
212:
171:
642:
178:
144:
139:
455:
in their names, which "has always appealed to the oafish risibles of the
American plain people" – is what the General notability guideline means by "
148:
519:
as something not worth taking seriously, rather than funny or amusing. This has nothing to do with the notability of "inherently funny words". —
410:
such as essays, humor writing, etc. – please provide some references to prove that the phenomenon is so widely recognized, so that the article
131:
624:
enough reliable sources here to warrant it being considered notable, but the vast majority of the article needs to be removed or rewritten.
723:
698:
671:
654:
633:
605:
559:
528:
490:
472:
446:
431:
397:
382:
331:
310:
272:
77:
404:
significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, and that address the topic directly and in detail
625:
459:". Any interpretive claim about Mencken's statement – such as to support the general idea that words can be inherently funny – would be
568:
a list of words (or numbers) that someone or other found to be funny, with no unifying context provided by the sources – see sections
233:
56:). I still question the notability of the topic, but some verifiable content exists that could be merged into another page such as
200:
593:
250:
17:
194:
650:
53:
685:
The nomination's claims seem to be blatantly false and, as this is a repeat nomination, it seems to be vexatious per
504:
135:
190:
742:
694:
40:
706:. Most of the content starting with the Star Trek tidbit ought to go, but the topic is notable and easily meets
718:
592:. Juxtaposing such a number of trivial facts – as if to prove that yes, the subject is notable – constitutes
240:
629:
477:
And what are the "other writings of professional comics" that address the topic of "inherently funny words"
338:
257:
apart from trivial mentions. The concept of "inherently funny" is a matter of opinion, and therefore fails
667:
646:
555:
442:
393:
327:
738:
662:
Maybe this repeat nomination will prod some of us (who, me?) to improve this admittedly weak article. -
601:
582:
576:
570:
524:
486:
468:
427:
419:
378:
306:
268:
127:
83:
73:
36:
690:
281:
259:
254:
358:
347:
226:
206:
711:
353:
Granted, there's more reliably sourced information here than that simply about research. However,
460:
343:
68:. Deletion may be considered once this is accomplished or at least discussed on the talk page. —
365:
on the subject would be an interesting addition to the article about the general phenomenon of
301:, but doing so would leave nothing here but a list of trivia, hence the nomination to delete. —
663:
551:
438:
407:
389:
323:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
737:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
686:
597:
520:
482:
464:
423:
415:
374:
302:
264:
69:
586:. None of the references in these sections address the topic "directly and in detail" per
336:
I think there's some confusion here over what constitutes reliable sourcing. According to
297:
64:
707:
588:
478:
456:
411:
403:
354:
165:
451:
I don't think that
Mencken's list of "joke towns" – owing to having the letter
388:
is solid evidence that this phenomenon exists and is widely recognized. -
512:
291:
58:
366:
731:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
346:. This concept for this article seems entirely based on such
110:
Articles for deletion/Inherently funny word (4th nomination)
105:
Articles for deletion/Inherently funny word (3rd nomination)
100:
Articles for deletion/Inherently funny word (2nd nomination)
359:
reliable sources for statements directly attributed to him
280:
The most substantive sources used in the article refer to
373:
humor, which is supposedly the topic of this article. —
161:
157:
153:
225:
511:
in the names of "joke towns", including a fictional
710:through the first few references in the article.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
745:). No further edits should be made to this page.
643:list of Language-related deletion discussions
361:, but scarcely for factual claims. Mencken's
239:
116:Articles for deletion/Inherently funny word 2
8:
641:Note: This debate has been included in the
414:to establish the importance of the topic. —
95:Articles for deletion/Inherently funny word
640:
457:addresses the topic directly and in detail
481:? Please provide some actual citations. —
284:, which describes "perceived humor" (not
255:coverage in reliable, independent sources
313:(updated 19:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC))
437:topic. As we will agree to disagree. -
369:, but don't demonstrate a given word’s
92:
587:
581:
575:
569:
337:
296:
290:
258:
63:
57:
7:
412:does not depend on original research
503:words are funny. In his 1948 essay
90:
24:
564:Except that most of the article
282:a paper by Chris Westbury et al.
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
724:01:43, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
699:14:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
672:15:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
655:07:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
634:21:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
606:18:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
560:20:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
529:21:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
491:19:53, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
473:17:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
447:22:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
432:20:49, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
398:20:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
383:19:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
332:19:03, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
311:18:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
273:20:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
78:21:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
357:'s essays and criticism are
762:
571:§ Words described as funny
507:, he mentions the letter
734:Please do not modify it.
52:. Nomination withdrawn (
32:Please do not modify it.
339:Knowledge:Verifiability
577:§ Funny nonsense words
495:In fact, Mencken does
479:directly and in detail
89:AfDs for this article:
128:Inherently funny word
84:Inherently funny word
505:"The Podunk Mystery"
717:
657:
647:Shawn in Montreal
594:original research
461:original research
344:original research
251:original research
54:non-admin closure
753:
736:
716:
402:If there exists
244:
243:
229:
181:
169:
151:
34:
761:
760:
756:
755:
754:
752:
751:
750:
749:
743:deletion review
732:
583:§ Funny numbers
408:primary sources
186:
177:
142:
126:
123:
121:
118:
87:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
759:
757:
748:
747:
727:
726:
701:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
637:
636:
610:
609:
608:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
493:
475:
351:
298:Humor research
247:
246:
183:
122:
120:
119:
114:
112:
107:
102:
97:
91:
88:
86:
81:
65:Humor research
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
758:
746:
744:
740:
735:
729:
728:
725:
722:
721:
715:
714:
709:
705:
702:
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
681:
680:
673:
669:
665:
661:
660:
659:
658:
656:
652:
648:
644:
639:
638:
635:
631:
627:
626:64.183.45.226
623:
618:
615:- And I mean
614:
611:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
590:
585:
584:
579:
578:
573:
572:
567:
563:
562:
561:
557:
553:
549:
546:
545:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
498:
494:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
449:
448:
444:
440:
435:
434:
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
409:
406:, – not just
405:
401:
400:
399:
395:
391:
386:
385:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
360:
356:
355:H. L. Mencken
352:
349:
345:
341:
340:
335:
334:
333:
329:
325:
321:
318:
317:
316:
315:
314:
312:
308:
304:
300:
299:
294:
293:
287:
283:
279:
275:
274:
270:
266:
262:
261:
260:WP:NOTSOAPBOX
256:
252:
242:
238:
235:
232:
228:
224:
220:
217:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
192:
189:
188:Find sources:
184:
180:
176:
173:
167:
163:
159:
155:
150:
146:
141:
137:
133:
129:
125:
124:
117:
113:
111:
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
96:
93:
85:
82:
80:
79:
75:
71:
67:
66:
61:
60:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
733:
730:
719:
712:
703:
682:
664:DavidWBrooks
621:
616:
612:
565:
552:DavidWBrooks
547:
516:
508:
500:
496:
452:
439:DavidWBrooks
390:DavidWBrooks
370:
362:
348:WP:SYNTHESIS
324:DavidWBrooks
319:
285:
277:
276:
248:
236:
230:
222:
215:
209:
203:
197:
187:
174:
49:
47:
31:
28:
683:Speedy Keep
598:Sangdeboeuf
521:Sangdeboeuf
483:Sangdeboeuf
465:Sangdeboeuf
424:Sangdeboeuf
416:Sangdeboeuf
375:Sangdeboeuf
303:Sangdeboeuf
265:Sangdeboeuf
249:Apparently
213:free images
70:Sangdeboeuf
739:talk page
691:Andrew D.
687:WP:DELAFD
613:Weak Keep
499:say that
37:talk page
741:or in a
371:inherent
363:opinions
320:Response
286:inherent
172:View log
39:or in a
219:WP refs
207:scholar
145:protect
140:history
708:WP:GNG
589:WP:GNG
580:, and
513:Podunk
292:Humour
191:Google
149:delete
59:Humour
367:humor
253:. No
234:JSTOR
195:books
179:Stats
166:views
158:watch
154:links
16:<
720:Wölf
704:Keep
695:talk
668:talk
651:talk
630:talk
622:just
617:very
602:talk
556:talk
548:Keep
525:talk
517:joke
487:talk
469:talk
443:talk
428:talk
420:talk
394:talk
379:talk
328:talk
307:talk
295:and
278:Note
269:talk
227:FENS
201:news
162:logs
136:talk
132:edit
74:talk
50:keep
713:Daß
596:. —
497:not
463:. —
263:. —
241:TWL
170:– (
62:or
697:)
689:.
670:)
653:)
645:.
632:)
604:)
574:,
566:is
558:)
527:)
489:)
471:)
445:)
430:)
422:)
396:)
381:)
330:)
309:)
271:)
221:)
164:|
160:|
156:|
152:|
147:|
143:|
138:|
134:|
76:)
693:(
666:(
649:(
628:(
600:(
554:(
523:(
509:k
501:K
485:(
467:(
453:k
441:(
426:(
418:(
392:(
377:(
350:.
326:(
305:(
267:(
245:)
237:·
231:·
223:·
216:·
210:·
204:·
198:·
193:(
185:(
182:)
175:·
168:)
130:(
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.