Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dawg

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 of the debate was speedy redirect. --SYCTHOS^talk

[edit] Dawg

Not a vote to delete. Article appears to have been deleted out-of-process. I have restored it and am now subjecting it to the normal deletion process. The reason given for deletion was "nonsense". Nohat 06:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete: Wikipedia is not a slang guide (WP:NOT). I don't see why this was restored. Please consider WP:SNOW next time. --Hetar 07:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as G4 recreation of deleted material. --Aaron 08:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  • G4 does not apply to this article because the article was undeleted per the undeletion policy and when it was originally speedy deleted it did not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. Nohat 09:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Could I please have a pointer to where the original out-of-process discussion took place? (Or did an admin just nuke it on sight without any discussion at all?) All I can find is this fourteen-month-old VfD which was closed with a clear consensus to delete. --Aaron 17:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

• [1] — Adrian Lamo ·· 21:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete per Aaron. Otherwise Delete per nom. Doesn't even belong in wiktionary. Metta Bubble 08:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non speedy. Disagreements with the Wikipedia speedy deletion criteria do not belong on AfD. Follow community consensus process every time; that way, no one can claim that AfD runs according to inconsistent or unfair rules. To be clear: Doesn't meet speedy delete criteria. -ikkyu2 (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete - as has already happened! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 10:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails to meet WP:CSD, per ikkyu2. —Caesura^(t) 13:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete per Aaron. --Terence Ong 15:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but Merge into another article, one that has something to do with slang (possibly the entry on slang), then redirect the origional page. But don't delete. Dr. B 15:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, Merge, & Redirect per Dr. B. — Adrian Lamo ·· 21:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy redirect per Dr. B. Since this article would qualify for CSD G4, I have created a redirect to African American Vernacular English. Feel free to change to a more appropriate redirect. --SYCTHOS^talk 23:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

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.