857:
written policy. To argue against it, one should show that an article isn't a dictionary article, or a mere collection of dictionary articles strung together in a list. So where are the sources that discuss the "sociological and historical details" claimed to exist above? Where are the sources that
880:
My argument is that we have a list that is of interest for anybody who is looking for particular references in our culture (slang terms; other social aspects related to police and community). I really can't say I undestand the wiki policy on lists such as this. We seem to have them by the thousands.
245:
What I mean to say is that some people would want to delete this list for other reasons that have no link to wiki quality standards. If you look at it objectively, you will find nothing wrong, just as you won't with others. That was just a reaction, though. My argument to keep is my second sentence.
404:
WP is not a dictionary. The info is uncited and I see some mistakes. For instance in "5-0" a 5 liter car engine is not very large, 305 cubic inches vs a 350 cubic inch engine which would be what is really used on a police car. So it looks like people just put in stuff as they feel like it. A lot is
654:
the reason why there are so many slang names for the police and how in broad terms they developed, even the acceptance of their use in society I might tend to agree. As it stands (and has stood for a number of years) this is a list of word definitions and some etymology, you know what they call
146:
A lot may have changed since 2005, but has it done so in relation to this article? It may not always be wrong to put an article up for deletion a second time, but it is often not good practice to do so unless there have been significant changes. The one time I ever did this myself I was able to
438:
I mentioned the mistake because it is an example of the carelessness of the article's contributors. I have no special way of finding information on slang expressions for police officers. I certainly have no way of proving one doesn't exist. One the other hand someone could remove all the uncited
909:
Yes, this would only be a deposit of those terms. We would have one place to find an extensive list of slang terms for police officers. I don't know if this is right, but it seems wikipedia is used a lot for this. On the other hand, there was the suggestion that the article itself could give an
296:
DeadlyAssassin, I didn't mean you personally. But I'm sure a lot of people would want this list to go since this is a list about insults, not cartoon dummies. What I meant from the beginning was that if you look at it objectively, a list of dummies is as good as a list of insults. That's what I
331:
Any presently unsourced terms can be removed if reliable sources do not exist, or if the sources exist they can be added. Deletion is not a substitute for editing. Such unofficial terms have been used for police officers and well documented in reliable sources for over 200 years. Peelers:
498:. Just throwing it out as a possible compromise in the discussion. I mean, when I look into an article about police officers, I would probably except some nicknames/slang terms be mentioned in there; the article is small enough that this stuff could be merged into
615:
Can you explain what's encyclopedic about it? It's a list of words, the definitions of which belong in
Wiktionary. It's all very well for users to call it sociological, but at the moment this is just a collection of slang, and has been for years. As we know
800:
No one addressed that argument by saying that wikipedia IS a dictionary. That policy was never put into question. What has been argued, by at least three editors, is that this subject is of interest for an encyclopedia, as a legitimate sociological issue.
551:
for want of any better choice. Merging into "police officers" seems odd for sure, and wiktionary does not actually have a set up for lists ... it should be edited for sources and errors, but that is not actually a valid reason for deletion in itself.
128:
862:? What is the "sociological issue" and where has it been documented? Or are you arguing that Knowledge (XXG) should be the first to put all of these words together and document a sociological issue underpinning them, in violation of our
841:"Cultural reference" is often used to disguise the fact that there isn't really an encyclopaedic article to be had. It's a woolly phrase that really doesn't mean anything concrete. The thinking behind it is almost always that
826:
Simply, I don't believe that it is going against that policy. That is what some people are arguing. I believe that even while it remains non-descriptive, it is a legitimate list on wikipedia for a set of cultural references.
147:
argue that discussions had moved on, and it was deleted. Knowledge (XXG) is not paper, this is an article of some legitimate sociological interest, more than just a dictionary or an indiscriminate collection of information.
881:
I did make a reference to other editors claiming a sociological background being developt in the article. As for the necessary sources, I have to say I would be very interested in seeing them myself.
351:
87:
82:
127:
Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary or an indiscriminate collection of information. This is the 2nd nomination for this list. The last debate was held in 2005 and reached no consensus see
91:
367:
The original nomination didn't mention references, although as others have said the article is completely unreferenced. I don't see how this mitigates against the fact that wikipedia is
895:
But what is the reason that this should take place on
Knowledge (XXG)? If people are interested in doing research on social trends they can look elsewhere and find the data they need.
74:
120:
842:
348:
422:
the way to deal with mistakes is to edit; the way to deal with lack of citations is to add them. This is a possibly encyclopedic topic, and there's literature on it.
161:
There have been changes in terms of how
Knowledge (XXG) cosniders notability, and the emergence of other projects like Wikitionary which didn't exist back then. --
636:
The list will only grow more detailed in time with sources and historical and sociological details. Totally notable from a linguistics and sociology standpoint.
264:
it's amazing you found your way to this discussion. Please don't accuse me of having ulterior motives in the future and assume good faith. Oh sorry, I mean
846:
297:
meant. Please take notice that you are reacting to a response. If you read what I wrote at the beginning, you will see no sting there for anybody. Thank you.
534:
sourced entries to
Wiktionary and organize there using a category. Delete the rest. This isn't a list of encyclopedia articles, just a list of words/terms.--
78:
336:
339:
342:
345:
70:
62:
774:
To be honest, several can be cited. "Pig", "filth", "bobby", "Plod", and "Sweeney", most likely. I've never heard "Woodentop", though. It's like
333:
956:
919:
904:
890:
875:
836:
821:
810:
795:
784:
769:
750:
736:
704:
686:
665:
645:
626:
610:
591:
561:
543:
526:
510:
480:
466:
448:
433:
414:
396:
377:
362:
317:
306:
291:
274:
255:
240:
226:
207:
186:
167:
156:
137:
56:
815:
Is your argument by that rationale then that whether the article is descriptive or not and whether it is against policy can be ignored? --
760:
948:
457:
way to do it is usually to source what you can, then purge what you can't. People find this far less objectionable than blind purging.
17:
863:
947:
whether or not it is kept on
Knowledge (XXG), since a copy of this probably should reside there regardless of if it exists here.
231:
How is it as good as any other? In a deletion discussion, it would help to use facts and policies other than personal opinion.
971:
36:
775:
471:
Fair enough. If I decide to do that I will do a Google search on each item to see if I can find a source for it.
970:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
641:
182:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
574:. Wiktionary not only has full thesaurus capabilities, it also makes use the MediaWiki software's ability to
952:
900:
716:
Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary; however, Wiktionary is. Besides, it's rather worrying when there are
476:
444:
410:
217:
This list is at least as good as any other. And it's not a dictionary entry, but a pop culture reference.
152:
570:
set up for lists, it has plenty of them, including many lists of slang synonyms for things, such as
816:
790:
764:
660:
637:
621:
372:
312:
269:
178:
162:
132:
915:
886:
832:
806:
746:
700:
523:
507:
302:
251:
222:
896:
871:
682:
587:
557:
472:
440:
406:
148:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
519:
503:
789:
Absolutely mate, which was why I didn't include unreferenced as a reason for deletion. :) --
539:
358:
756:
617:
368:
265:
261:
195:
605:
461:
393:
288:
237:
204:
673:
sociological and historical details? Please cite a source that demonstrates that there
571:
282:. Thanks for that additional assessment, it helps your argument a lot (at least to me).
495:
911:
882:
828:
802:
742:
696:
677:
any sociological and historical details to be discussed in an encyclopaedic fashion.
659:
don't you?. Calling it sociological and linguistically notable doesn't make it so. --
429:
298:
247:
218:
867:
780:
732:
678:
583:
553:
387:
as I understand where both parties are coming from and could see it go either way.
129:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Slang and offensive terms for police officers
50:
108:
755:
Well, the no citation one was, I don't think the dictionary one has. After all
720:
535:
354:
910:
historical exposition on the phenomenon. We are still waiting for the sources.
620:
specifically says that
Knowledge (XXG) are not "... slang and idiom guides." --
246:
I agree with PatGallacher. This has the value of holding a cultural reference.
656:
602:
458:
389:
284:
233:
200:
311:
Point taken. Apologies for my sharp reaction, tiredness is my only excuse. --
845:
causes encyclopaedia articles to magically arise from nothing. Conversely,
424:
601:- sensible, encyclopaedic list, no arguments presented for deletion.
778:: "baby", "sweetie", "cutie" can be. "Newfoundland"? Not so much.
964:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
860:
actually discuss something that isn't dictionary article content
353:, etc. Try Google advanced book search and Google News archive.
741:
Those two arguments were already addressed several times.
115:
104:
100:
96:
194:: "Other Stuff Exists" is not a valid argument. See
177:
There are many such lists on the
Knowledge (XXG). --
847:
Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
974:). No further edits should be made to this page.
691:Just try to do a simple google search, such as:
578:lists. After all, a list of words is simply a
8:
843:cargo cult encyclopaedia article writing
439:material. Would you like me to do that?
71:List of slang terms for police officers
63:List of slang terms for police officers
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
864:Knowledge (XXG):No original research
24:
502:without much a hassle as far as
131:, a lot has changed since 2005.
566:Nonsense. Wiktionary not only
260:If you can't find your way to
1:
853:clear policy, it is even our
650:If this were an article that
957:04:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
920:18:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
905:16:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
891:11:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
876:19:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
837:13:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
822:13:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
811:13:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
796:13:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
785:13:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
770:13:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
751:12:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
737:12:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
705:03:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
687:19:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
666:13:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
646:20:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
627:13:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
611:14:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
592:19:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
562:13:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
544:07:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
527:06:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
511:06:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
481:05:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
467:20:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
449:05:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
434:04:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
415:04:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
405:also kind of mean-spirited.
397:03:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
378:13:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
363:02:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
318:13:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
307:12:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
292:03:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
275:02:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
256:02:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
241:02:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
227:02:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
208:02:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
187:01:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
168:01:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
157:01:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
138:01:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
57:04:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
776:List of terms of endearment
991:
693:use of pig slang sociology
967:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
522:about it, either! ;)
580:category of articles
576:automatically create
582:, in a dictionary.
945:Copy to Wiktionary
634:Keep (Strong Keep)
572:d:Wikisaurus:penis
347:, "County mounty"
280:Reply for Maziotis
44:The result was
982:
969:
819:
793:
767:
726:tags for nearly
725:
719:
695:. I found some.
663:
624:
608:
464:
375:
371:a dictionary. --
315:
272:
165:
135:
118:
112:
94:
53:
34:
990:
989:
985:
984:
983:
981:
980:
979:
978:
972:deletion review
965:
817:
791:
765:
723:
717:
661:
622:
606:
520:don't be a dick
462:
373:
313:
270:
268:, happy now? --
163:
133:
114:
85:
69:
66:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
988:
986:
977:
976:
960:
959:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
923:
922:
818:Deadly∀ssassin
798:
792:Deadly∀ssassin
766:Deadly∀ssassin
711:
710:
709:
708:
707:
668:
662:Deadly∀ssassin
638:Critical Chris
631:
630:
629:
623:Deadly∀ssassin
596:
595:
594:
546:
529:
513:
506:is concerned.
500:Police officer
496:Police officer
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
417:
399:
382:
381:
380:
374:Deadly∀ssassin
326:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
314:Deadly∀ssassin
294:
277:
271:Deadly∀ssassin
243:
212:
211:
210:
179:Mr Accountable
172:
171:
170:
164:Deadly∀ssassin
134:Deadly∀ssassin
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
987:
975:
973:
968:
962:
961:
958:
954:
950:
949:76.66.198.171
946:
943:
921:
917:
913:
908:
907:
906:
902:
898:
894:
893:
892:
888:
884:
879:
878:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
856:
852:
848:
844:
840:
839:
838:
834:
830:
825:
824:
823:
820:
814:
813:
812:
808:
804:
799:
797:
794:
788:
787:
786:
783:
782:
777:
773:
772:
771:
768:
762:
758:
754:
753:
752:
748:
744:
740:
739:
738:
735:
734:
729:
722:
715:
712:
706:
702:
698:
694:
690:
689:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
669:
667:
664:
658:
653:
649:
648:
647:
643:
639:
635:
632:
628:
625:
619:
614:
613:
612:
609:
604:
600:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
569:
565:
564:
563:
559:
555:
550:
547:
545:
541:
537:
533:
530:
528:
525:
521:
517:
514:
512:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
490:
482:
478:
474:
470:
469:
468:
465:
460:
456:
452:
451:
450:
446:
442:
437:
436:
435:
431:
427:
426:
421:
418:
416:
412:
408:
403:
400:
398:
395:
392:
391:
386:
383:
379:
376:
370:
366:
365:
364:
360:
356:
352:
349:
346:
343:
340:
337:
334:
330:
327:
319:
316:
310:
309:
308:
304:
300:
295:
293:
290:
287:
286:
281:
278:
276:
273:
267:
263:
259:
258:
257:
253:
249:
244:
242:
239:
236:
235:
230:
229:
228:
224:
220:
216:
213:
209:
206:
203:
202:
197:
193:
190:
189:
188:
184:
180:
176:
173:
169:
166:
160:
159:
158:
154:
150:
145:
142:
141:
140:
139:
136:
130:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
966:
963:
944:
897:Steve Dufour
859:
854:
850:
779:
731:
727:
713:
692:
674:
670:
651:
633:
598:
579:
575:
567:
548:
531:
515:
499:
491:
473:Steve Dufour
454:
441:Steve Dufour
423:
419:
407:Steve Dufour
401:
388:
384:
328:
283:
279:
232:
214:
199:
191:
174:
149:PatGallacher
143:
126:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
338:. "Fuzz:"
518:— Oh, and
849:not only
714:Transwiki
652:describes
341:. "Pig:"
912:Maziotis
883:Maziotis
866:policy?
829:Maziotis
803:Maziotis
743:Maziotis
697:Maziotis
675:even are
524:MuZemike
508:MuZemike
299:Maziotis
248:Maziotis
219:Maziotis
121:View log
868:Uncle G
781:Sceptre
733:Sceptre
679:Uncle G
584:Uncle G
554:Collect
516:Comment
504:WP:SIZE
385:Neutral
88:protect
83:history
52:MBisanz
855:oldest
761:policy
757:WP:NOT
730:item.
618:WP:NOT
536:Michig
402:Delete
394:(talk)
369:WP:NOT
355:Edison
289:(talk)
266:WP:AGF
262:WP:NOT
238:(talk)
205:(talk)
196:WP:WAX
116:delete
92:delete
728:every
657:those
494:into
492:Merge
455:best'
390:Tavix
285:Tavix
234:Tavix
201:Tavix
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
953:talk
916:talk
901:talk
887:talk
872:talk
833:talk
807:talk
763:. --
747:talk
701:talk
683:talk
671:What
642:talk
603:Wily
599:Keep
588:talk
558:talk
549:Keep
540:talk
532:Move
477:talk
459:Wily
453:The
445:talk
430:talk
420:Keep
411:talk
359:talk
329:Keep
303:talk
252:talk
223:talk
215:Keep
192:Note
183:talk
175:Keep
153:talk
144:Keep
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
46:keep
759:is
425:DGG
344:,
955:)
918:)
903:)
889:)
874:)
851:is
835:)
809:)
749:)
724:}}
721:cn
718:{{
703:)
685:)
644:)
590:)
568:is
560:)
542:)
479:)
447:)
432:)
413:)
361:)
350:,
335:,
305:)
254:)
225:)
198:.
185:)
155:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
48:.
951:(
914:(
899:(
885:(
870:(
831:(
805:(
745:(
699:(
681:(
640:(
607:D
586:(
556:(
538:(
475:(
463:D
443:(
428:(
409:(
357:(
301:(
250:(
221:(
181:(
151:(
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.