237:
t's an informative, and most of all, well-sourced list. The fact that an article is a key target for vandalism is not a good or even, valid criterion, for deletion in my opinion. If it were, we could never have anything informative on ethnic hatred, atheism, abortion, sexual reproduction,
344:. Deleting an article because it is frequently vandalised would be letting vandals dictate content on Knowledge (XXG) and I don't think that would be acceptable. I do still think teh article could be deleted as it just replicates the content of another better sourced article. ]
332:- whilst I think the article should be deleted I do not think that being a vandal target is any kind of reason to justify deletion. What would Knowledge (XXG) be like if Knowledge (XXG) just removed content that was frequently vandalised. There wouldn't be articles on
78:
310:. The material is redundant and having different ways of sorting isn't a sufficient reason to have two versions with slightly different content. These lists are vandal-magnets and the fewer of them we have the easier they are to maintain.
212:
I think the way this list is sorted is very reasonable, but I agree that there doesn't need to be two different lists for the same kind of information. But there are sortable wiki tables that could solve this problem. See for example
201:
But where does it end - do we really need multiple articles containing the same information listed in different ways? How many lists of Ethinc Slurs could be created - listed by prevalence, by country of origin, by first usage, etc.
268:
73:
132:
267:
At no point in the nomination was it mention that the article was a target for vandalism - I agree that would be a bad reason to delete an article. It was the reason given in the
105:
100:
109:
92:
143:
which is a more complete and more importantly - better sourced - article. The whole concept of the page is badly described in the introduction and seems to be inherently
428:
Depending on the list, sometimes a sortable table is best, sometimes a separate article. At this point is not not seem obvious how to convert this to a sortable table.
473:
456:
439:
406:
358:
320:
294:
258:
221:
192:
167:
57:
244:
or has been the subject of much discussion, suggests to me the nominator hasn't done the right steps in deciding whether this should be at AFD or not.
96:
17:
311:
241:
88:
63:
290:
254:
214:
491:
36:
452:
490:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
53:
151:- which sound bias and unencylopaedic indicate that whole whole concept of the list is questionable. Also
317:
380:
in the nomination were concerns over vandalism mentioned as a justification for deletion. Vandalism is
276:
Sorry, I must have mixed it up with another AFD I was previewing. But, I still standby my decision to
238:
homosexuality or other LGBT related facts: just because it is controversial doesn't mean delete. Also,
469:
448:
389:
307:
177:
140:
281:
245:
188:
49:
184:
engine in wikipedia boith lists play their navigational role, because the list is quite long. `'
418:- Sorry, I was getting a bit frustrated by people replying to an arguement that wasn't made. ]
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
447:. I would suggest merge the other text here, alphabetical ordering is much less informative.
144:
314:
385:
160:
152:
465:
403:
333:
164:
435:
218:
185:
126:
355:
139:
This article is completely redundant - the material within it is covered in
430:
337:
149:"or downright insulting and racist manner in the English-speaking world"
79:
Articles for deletion/List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity (2nd
Nomination)
367:
Again, vandalism concerns were not mentioned once in the nomination. ]
240:
the fact that the article hasn't been edited that much since the last
354:
Well sourced. Vandalism concerns are not a valid reason to delete.
484:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
341:
181:
122:
118:
114:
74:
Articles for deletion/List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity
147:. The fact that the lead in contains phrases such as
384:
a good reason to delete a page; however not meeting
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
494:). No further edits should be made to this page.
464:. Valuable for a number of academic reasons.
8:
271:but that should not predujice this one. ]
180:is sorted alphabetically. Until we have
157:"Usage guides or slang and idiom guides"
215:2007_Eurovision_Song_Contest#Semi-final
71:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
153:Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary
70:
24:
89:List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity
64:List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity
1:
474:15:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
457:17:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
440:02:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
407:01:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
359:23:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
321:21:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
295:20:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
259:19:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
222:19:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
193:18:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
176:. It is sorted by ethnicity.
168:17:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
58:05:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
388:and being the duplicate of
511:
402:Oh, you're a big talker.
487:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
155:and should not contain
69:AfDs for this article:
308:List of ethnic slurs
178:List of ethnic slurs
141:List of ethnic slurs
395:
502:
489:
393:
286:
269:first nominatiom
250:
130:
112:
34:
510:
509:
505:
504:
503:
501:
500:
499:
498:
492:deletion review
485:
449:Pavel Vozenilek
293:
282:
257:
246:
103:
87:
84:
67:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
508:
506:
497:
496:
479:
477:
476:
459:
442:
422:
421:
420:
419:
410:
409:
371:
370:
369:
368:
362:
361:
348:
347:
346:
345:
334:George W. Bush
324:
323:
300:
299:
298:
297:
289:
273:
272:
262:
261:
253:
229:
228:
227:
226:
225:
224:
204:
203:
196:
195:
137:
136:
83:
82:
81:
76:
68:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
507:
495:
493:
488:
482:
481:
480:
475:
471:
467:
463:
460:
458:
454:
450:
446:
443:
441:
437:
433:
432:
427:
424:
423:
417:
414:
413:
412:
411:
408:
405:
401:
398:
397:
396:
392:may well be.
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
366:
365:
364:
363:
360:
357:
353:
350:
349:
343:
339:
335:
331:
328:
327:
326:
325:
322:
319:
316:
313:
309:
305:
302:
301:
296:
292:
288:
285:
280:the article.
279:
275:
274:
270:
266:
265:
264:
263:
260:
256:
252:
249:
243:
239:
234:
231:
230:
223:
220:
216:
211:
208:
207:
206:
205:
200:
199:
198:
197:
194:
191:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
171:
170:
169:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
134:
128:
124:
120:
116:
111:
107:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
85:
80:
77:
75:
72:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
50:Pascal.Tesson
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
486:
483:
478:
461:
444:
429:
425:
415:
399:
390:another page
381:
377:
373:
372:
351:
329:
303:
283:
277:
247:
236:
232:
209:
173:
159:per policy (
156:
148:
138:
45:
43:
31:
28:
315:Will Beback
233:Strong Keep
466:Kingturtle
404:Mandsford
165:Guest9999
378:no point
338:Chickens
219:sgeureka
133:View log
400:Comment
374:COMMENT
330:Comment
210:Comment
106:protect
101:history
386:policy
161:WP:NOT
110:delete
416:Reply
376:- At
304:Merge
287:udget
251:udget
189:: -->
186:Míkka
127:views
119:watch
115:links
16:<
470:talk
462:Keep
453:talk
445:Keep
436:talk
426:Keep
356:Rray
352:Keep
342:Lard
312:·:·
278:keep
217:. –
182:DBMS
174:keep
123:logs
97:talk
93:edit
54:talk
46:Keep
431:DGG
382:not
340:or
318:·:·
306:to
242:AFD
163:).
145:POV
131:– (
472:)
455:)
438:)
336:,
291:zŋ
255:zŋ
235:-
125:|
121:|
117:|
113:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
56:)
48:.
468:(
451:(
434:(
394:]
284:R
248:R
202:]
190:t
135:)
129:)
91:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.