Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winter holiday season

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 keep the rewrite. - Mailer Diablo 15:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Winter holiday season

• Delete and/or merge with Holiday. The article content breaches WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:POV and is a neologism. The "winter holiday" season is a neologism and alternative for Christmas season, and is only ever referenced in the USA and maybe Canada. Also, people do not celebrate "Winter holiday season" as the creator says—they celebrate any given holiday, such as Christmas or Hanukkah. User:Calgary's assertions that "Winter holiday season" itself is celebrated by many is OR at best, and IMO ridiculous. The subsequent sections offer no citations and overall the article is abundant with OR. Additionally, there are many grammatical errors and the author writes that "it begins in Thanksgiving in many countries"... Thanksgiving is only celebrated in 2 countries— OLP 1999 00:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete/merge into Holiday#The_Northern_Hemisphere_winter_holiday_season per nom. --Daniel Olsen 00:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above Jcuk 07:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete I can't believe this phrase even exists, apparently Christmas offends non-christians. --Alex ^{(talk here)} 12:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Also the article hasn't been written very well at all. --Alex ^{(talk here)} 12:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • So we are not here to offend anyone? The fact that a term may offend is not a reason to delete. Ansell 11:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete in memory of all those who happily take December 25 as a holiday but refuse to acknowledge its provenance. Neologistic anyway, though not as bad as Winterval. Just zis Guy you know? 12:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep rewrite, which has sources and establishes the significance of the subject (good work, Uncle G). Other Delete advocates please review the new content. Just zis Guy you know? 11:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Same. Sahasrahla 17:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. User Uncle G has put a lot of effort into making this into a well-researched piece. Plinth molecular gathered 19:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• His alterations are misleading and have nothing to do with "winter holiday season" as is used by secularists for a euphemism. Also, this is a neologism and Wikipedia has policies against them.— OLP 1999 20:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• There is no policy against neologisms, WP:NEO is just a guideline. The main reason why we typically don't keep neologisms is because they fail the content policies that you cited in the nomination. However, the article appears to meet our content policies now, so there's no reason why we can't keep an article on them. JYolkowski // talk 00:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I suggest to Uncle G that he save a copy of the page showing what his additions are and what the original text is. Then, once the article is deleted, he could use his additions to write a journal article on the topic. Cromulent Kwyjibo 23:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Not nice - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. merge with more appropiate artical.McTeedeium
• Delete per WP:NEO. Danny Lilithborne 23:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, original reasons for deletion no longer apply. JYolkowski // talk 00:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep As it has been improved a lot thanks to Uncle G Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 01:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep in some form. The term seems to be established in the USA. Either keep as is or merge contents into Holiday and set up a redirect. Nunquam Dormio 08:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and merge with Festivus - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Often-used term worthy of an article. Flying Jazz 02:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Abstain - I'm not sure I've seen this term in all that wide of usage, but the phenomenon (if that's the appropriate word for it) is notable. I am curious how many other articles this is covered on to where we couldn't incorporate all of that into one article and avoid having the same information in 50 different places. Peyna 19:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Well researched... I know, it starts off with an uncited statement currently but its not like the topic is new so there is commentary available on it. Ansell 11:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - seems fine now. BlueValour 01:48, 5 September 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.