Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheeple

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 NO CONSENSUS. Owen× ☎ 19:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sheeple

Neologism that belongs on wiktionary, image is pure POV for BJAODN  ALKIVAR™ 07:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• Neutral - do hear this a lot on the websites I frequent but I really can't decide if the article deserves to stay. That pic, on the other hand, is hilarious, if a bit POV. --Cyde Weys _talk^contribs 08:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • These questions should help you to decide: Can an encyclopaedia article about sheeple (not about the word, but about the actual concept) be written? Is there anything that sources have said about sheeple, in addition to describing them as believing whatever they are told? Uncle G 14:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep: term definitely used contemporary politcal discussions. On the other hand, the article is little more than a dictdef with an hilarious image. Jamie 09:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: this is not a spur-of-the-moment humourous article, its history goes back to Oct 2004. Jamie 09:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Regardless of the creation date, do you see the content as anything more than a dicdef? If not you should be voting transwiki to the Wiktionary (which is where dictdef's belong).  ALKIVAR™ 09:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
      • That's a tough call. We have other articles which are not much more than dictdefs for words with (minor) cultural significance. Sheeple could possibly be expanded to explain its significance in the context of (inflamatory) American political discourse. But that's pretty weak, which is why I voted weak keep. Jamie
      • No, xe shouldn't. Transwikification of this article is not a valid option. Any opinions that that this article should be transwikied would have to be discounted. Uncle G 14:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as it is a word/term (frequently) used on AfD --SockpuppetSamuelson 14:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It is not frequently used. Indeed, it is hardly ever used. The phrase used here is "sheep vote". Wikipedia is not its own source, moreover. Uncle G 14:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

But Wiki should surely be its own glossary --SockpuppetSamuelson 14:35, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: This term is used on Usenet (at least in the groups I frequent). It is real. It is also a neologism. I suspect that transwiki is the best solution, but am open to persuasion in any direction right now. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 16:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Transwikfication is not a valid option. Please make another choice. Uncle G 19:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• Can I phone a friend? - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 23:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete As Just zis Guy, you know? pointed out, it would be transwikiable if wiktionary didn't already have it (thanks, Uncle G), and that's a subset of deletion. And, in answer to Uncle G's question about whether or not an article could be written on the concept of "sheeple", I believe the answer is... no. And even if it could, there's no reason to keep an article about something else under that title until it does get written. It's not like we need to keep articles' seats warm for them until they arrive or something like that. The Literate Engineer 19:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

No, Uncle G is (as usual) right. It can't be transwikid because Wiktionary already has it: [1]. I didn't check (I was in a hurry). - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 00:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• Comment to Uncle G: transwikification is a valid option, per preamble to WP:AFD. Jamie 21:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oops. Missed the fact that Wiktionary already has it. Jamie ^{(talk/contribs)} 05:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to herd mentality, which mentions "sheeple" near the top. FreplySpang (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to herd mentality seems entirely appropriate. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 00:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Useful terminology, though article needs a little balance. - Naif 04:41, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep The comments by the deletists on this page are proof enough that Sheeple exist. --Peter McConaughey 05:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: This AfD is self-referrential  :-) Jamie ^{(talk/contribs)} 05:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment McConaughey, you do realize that deleting the balancing text makes it less likely the entry will survive AfD? - Naif 05:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

• You made your point, but two biased POVs don't make an NPOV. Sources need to be cited and this article needs to be cleaned up and expanded, but the term definitely exists. Requesting a deletion because of POV in an article is silly. --Peter McConaughey 13:50, 17 December 2005 (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.