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 merge to Philadelphia dialect. Black Kite 00:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia slang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page is a glossary of slang terms, prohibited per WP:NAD. TheTrueSora 21:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - This article is not "about" Philadelphia slang, it is a list of Philadelphia slang. Nothing I have found in attempting to research the items in this article suggests there is such a thing as "Philadelphia slang". Yes, there are slang terms that are more common in and around Philly. However, there are no reliable sources that discuss this as a notable phenomenon. All of the sources currently cited are of individual uses of the slang term used in a way consistent with the supplied definition, not cites saying "Term is Philadelphia slang for definition." It's WP:NAD and WP:OR rolled into one. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Likely sources: Salvucci, Claudio R. The Philadelphia Dialect Dictionary. Bucks County, PA: Evolution Pub, 1996., Dennis Stanley Lebofsky, The lexicon of the Philadelphia metropolitan area 1970. DGG ( talk ) 00:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I don't have that one close at hand... "dialect" is not "slang". Dialect would be pronunciations: Philadelphians saying "wooder" for "water" and, well, "fiwadelfyan" for "Philadelphian". "Slang" is non-standard word usage, as (poorly) documented in the article. Without reliable sources, every Philadelphian (and a number of tourists and such) dropping by the page adds a term they heard somewhere in or around Philadelphia. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dialect covers differences in vocabulary as well as pronunciation (British English and American English, both dialects, being an obvious pair of examples). And since the sources DGG mentions are a dictionary and a lexicon, I'd expect them to focus more on vocabulary than pronounciation. Edit: somehow I failed to read the rest of the AfD before leaving this comment. Ignore me, and probably redirect to Philadelphia dialect. Olaf Davis (talk) 13:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep with additions of sources found by DGG and possible change of title; dialect includes both unique words and pronounciations. Bearian (talk) 01:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment So, change the title of the article, remove all of the content and add completely new content (based on one source) then keep the completely new article that is tangentially related to the current one? What are we keeping from the current article? The idea that people in Philadelphia speak differently than people elsewhere. Yes, by all means, start an article called "Philadelphia dialect" (or some such) if you think you have sources and content for it. As for the current slang dictionary... I find nothing to keep. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your view. Bearian (talk) 21:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The distinct article Philadelphia dialect exists, and has a section on lexicon which includes all relevant material from this article. — æk^Talk 11:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Philadelphia dialect. Thank you User:Æk for pointing that out. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 16:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Since none of the "sources" in this article actually say anything about the topic, what would we merge? - SummerPhD (talk) 16:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the bits with appropriate sourcing to Philadelphia dialect#Lexicon. Note, though, that many of the cited references mention the lexical items only in passing, and therefore don't constitute appropriate sources. Cnilep (talk) 03:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There's really no argument here, it's a clear violation of WP:NAD. --MelanieN (talk) 02:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

• Keep or Merge - All these terms are distinct to Philadelphia and its culture and are certainly notable Callmarcus (talk) 05:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Wikipedia is not a dictionary and none of the items are sourced as being Philadelphia slang. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:31, 2 December 2009 (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.