Talk:Drama queen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unless SOMEONE decides to create a wiktionary entry for drama queen, I would ask the vandals around here to stop deleting this entry. It's VERY LAZY just to delete an entry here just because YOU BELIEVE it should be a wiktionary entry without actually writing an entry in wiktionary.

What happens is when the wikipedia entry gets deleted is there is no entry in wiktionary so you have people clicking here wondering what is the meaning of the phrase 'drama queen'. There are several entries in wikipedia that actually link to drama queen and it's just a blank space.

And for the record, I don't believe drama queen should alone be a wiktionary entry (which is ironic considering there is no wiktionary entry at all) but a wikipedia entry. - 2 May 2006

• I was tempted to agree with the above, until I read the (deleted) entry in the history. I hate to be rude, but it was a poorly-written article that was little more than a dicdef, and a bad one at that. A good article on the subject of drama queens should:
  • Define the term, giving history and etymology.
  • Give examples--preferably fictional characters (like Albin in La Cage aux Folles/Albert in The Birdcage) or dead people like Truman Capote, so not to hurt the feelings of any real-life drama queens (who would probably regard it as a big deal).
  • A few references to sites like The Drama Queen Test, or Cosmopolitan's Drama Queen test, which provide appropriate context. (I know, those aren't really reliable sources, but given the subject...)
  • Cite appropriate reference (OED is always good, though they may not have "drama queen" in their lexicon), and use good Wikipedia style.
• In short, to avoid the {{wi}} tag, the article should be well more than a stub, which the removed text was. Now given the subject matter, a good article may not be possible. However, if someone manages to write one (I don't intend to do it), it probably should be allowed to stand. --EngineerScotty 04:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)