425:. There are one or two sources that are actually about the side hug in the article now, which means that it's probably not worth fighting over this any more. I still think it should probably be merged, but this is a losing battle that I'm rapidly losing the will the fight. I've struck my vote, as it seems debatable enough that I just can't care any more.
270:
I remain highly doubtful that this behavior exists as a "type of hug" as I have never in 39 years seen someone perform a "side hug". It looks like two people posing for a picture. Do people actually do this as a form of intimacy? I welcome anyone who has actually witnessed a "side hug" in real
266:
the hug rather than suggest people actually use these names. Though the meaning is intuitive once explained, I cannot find any reliable source which suggests people actually use this term apart from mentions of the non-notable rap song of the same
477:
Yes, my phrasing was a bit poor in my previous message, and yours is much, much better. Honestly, I think that I could have done better on that article. I just nominated another article I wrote for GAN, and I thought
170:
451:, but rather us Wikipedians jockeying over whether the article should stay or go, testing each other, consulting rule books, so we can learn from each other, sharpen our skillsets, and suchly. In a sense,
77:
131:
164:
72:
240:
attests to its usage in reliable sources. But this article seems to mostly be about the rap song. There's enough coverage to mention it at
323:. Googled it and found articles from real life papers referencing side hugs from 2014 w/out talking about rap videos so it still exists
17:
503:
472:
434:
417:
392:
358:
332:
311:
280:
253:
210:
56:
104:
99:
524:
185:
40:
108:
152:
262:
The article you refer to calls it a "side-to-side" or "buddy hug", and both terms seem to be created on-the-spot to
499:
430:
354:
249:
91:
459:
to make a truly excellent encyclopedia, so we can go create and improve top notch articles like you did with
276:
206:
479:
460:
328:
146:
520:
495:
426:
350:
272:
245:
202:
36:
346:
324:
468:
464:
413:
409:
142:
178:
370:
338:
292:
349:. We need articles that explain what a side hug is, not articles that casually use the phrase.
192:
483:
232:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
519:
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
201:
Not notable: all RS refer only to a non-notable 2009 rap song as evidence this term exists.
491:
405:
337:
Yes, pretty much any phrase can be found in newspapers. The test is whether it receives "
342:
227:
383:
53:
158:
307:
95:
125:
404:
Notable subject with multiple in-depth references in reliable sources meets the
237:
373:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
295:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
303:
87:
62:
463:-- much better article after your sharp mind honed it Ninja-style. :).--
244:, but there really isn't significant coverage of the phenomenon itself.
487:
482:
would be as easy to write; it wasn't. Now that I have access to
513:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
241:
221:
52:. Future merges or whatever are at editorial discretion.
121:
117:
113:
177:
380:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
302:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
191:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
527:). No further edits should be made to this page.
78:Articles for deletion/Side hug (2nd nomination)
8:
494:, I might be able to expand it further.
70:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
69:
24:
73:Articles for deletion/Side hug
1:
443:Comment. I do not see it as
504:01:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
492:The Knowledge (XXG) Library
473:00:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
435:22:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
418:21:21, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
393:11:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
359:05:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
333:05:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
312:21:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
57:01:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
544:
281:04:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
254:03:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
211:20:49, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
516:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
480:psychological thriller
461:Psychological thriller
68:AfDs for this article:
339:significant coverage
271:life to come forth.
226:Kind of mentioned
48:The result was
484:Highbeam Research
395:
391:
314:
233:Los Angeles Times
535:
518:
496:NinjaRobotPirate
427:NinjaRobotPirate
390:
388:
381:
379:
375:
351:NinjaRobotPirate
343:reliable sources
301:
297:
246:NinjaRobotPirate
196:
195:
181:
129:
111:
34:
543:
542:
538:
537:
536:
534:
533:
532:
531:
525:deletion review
514:
384:
382:
368:
345:", not whether
290:
138:
102:
86:
83:
66:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
541:
539:
530:
529:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
438:
437:
420:
398:
397:
396:
377:
376:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
317:
316:
315:
299:
298:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
268:
257:
256:
199:
198:
135:
82:
81:
80:
75:
67:
65:
60:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
540:
528:
526:
522:
517:
511:
505:
501:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
476:
475:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
441:
440:
439:
436:
432:
428:
424:
421:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
400:
399:
394:
389:
387:
378:
374:
372:
367:
366:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
335:
334:
330:
326:
322:
319:
318:
313:
309:
305:
300:
296:
294:
289:
288:
282:
278:
274:
273:TricksterWolf
269:
265:
261:
260:
259:
258:
255:
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
234:
229:
228:in an article
225:
223:
219:
215:
214:
213:
212:
208:
204:
203:TricksterWolf
194:
190:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
144:
141:
140:Find sources:
136:
133:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
106:
101:
97:
93:
89:
85:
84:
79:
76:
74:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
515:
512:
456:
455:are winning
452:
448:
444:
422:
401:
385:
369:
325:Time circuit
320:
291:
263:
231:
217:
216:
200:
188:
182:
174:
167:
161:
155:
149:
139:
49:
47:
31:
28:
449:your battle
238:Google News
165:free images
465:Tomwsulcer
457:our battle
410:Tomwsulcer
386:Sandstein
521:talk page
347:it exists
54:Lankiveil
37:talk page
523:or in a
490:through
371:Relisted
293:Relisted
264:describe
132:View log
88:Side hug
63:Side hug
39:or in a
447:losing
423:Comment
230:by the
171:WP refs
159:scholar
105:protect
100:history
406:WP:GNG
236:, and
143:Google
109:delete
488:JSTOR
267:name.
218:Merge
186:JSTOR
147:books
126:views
118:watch
114:links
16:<
500:talk
486:and
469:talk
431:talk
414:talk
402:Keep
355:talk
329:talk
321:Keep
308:talk
277:talk
250:talk
207:talk
179:FENS
153:news
122:logs
96:talk
92:edit
50:keep
445:you
408:.--
341:in
304:Mz7
242:hug
222:Hug
220:to
193:TWL
130:– (
502:)
471:)
453:we
433:)
416:)
357:)
331:)
310:)
279:)
252:)
209:)
173:)
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
498:(
467:(
429:(
412:(
353:(
327:(
306:(
275:(
248:(
224:.
205:(
197:)
189:·
183:·
175:·
168:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
145:(
137:(
134:)
128:)
90:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.