Talk:Medical slang
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-03-13. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
Contents |
[edit] Wikipedia is not a dictionary
This page is mainly a list of terms that are already in the references. It does add much on the rationale or history of the slang. Why duplicate them on Wikipedia? The article on Cockney Rhyming Slang is an example of how a slang article should be done - just a few examples, rather than the whole dictionary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 20.133.0.8 (talk • contribs) 2006-08-24 07:02:54 (UTC)
[edit] Copyvio revert
I've reverted this page to eliminate the copyvio section on "codes" added by anonymous user User:168.28.200.6. It was a copy-paste of an article on MedicineNet, whose content license would not permit that use and subsequent relicensing under GFDL. --FreelanceWizard 21:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] References
This article has sources listed at the end but needs inline citations or people will come along and add new examples without sources, and the reader won't be able to tell which are real and which aren't. On another matter it has to be said that this is pushing the definition of an encyclopedia article to breaking point. It's a list and belongs in Wiktionary or somewhere. What would be an article is a discussion of the phenomenon of medical slang, but this isn't it. 81.158.215.229 18:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Because the slang isn't permissible in formal notes it is passed orally or in emails. That means most of it won't have verifiable sources. It gets collected in online dictionaries compiled by enthusiasts, some of whom have worked in healthcare. Trying to trace back to verifiable sources is therefore a pointless and impossible task. What is needed is a disclaimer to this effect, not an impossible request for source citation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 20.133.0.8 (talk • contribs) 2006-12-13 07:58:38 (UTC)
- Wrong. Our content policies are firm. If content cannot be verified against sources, then it is not permissible to include it in Wikipedia. Disclaimers are unacceptable. I've removed the unsourced content and the disclaimer. I will revert any attempt to reintroduce the massive collection of unverifiable material that editors have acknowedleged to be unverifiable, and insist upon verifiability. I suggest that all other editors do the same. Uncle G 13:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Attention: Slang Glossary policy discussion underway
Slang glossaries violate the following policy:
Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. Wikipedia articles are not:
- Dictionary definitions. Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, please do not create an entry merely to define a term. An article should usually begin with a good definition; if you come across an article that is nothing more than a definition, see if there is information you can add that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. An exception to this rule is for articles about the cultural meanings of individual numbers.
- Lists of such definitions. There are, however, disambiguation pages consisting of pointers to other pages; these are used to clarify differing meanings of a word. Wikipedia also includes glossary pages for various specialized fields.
- A usage guide or slang and idiom guide. Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a Cockney chimney-sweep. However, it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to describe just how a word is used to distinguish among similar, easily confused ideas, as in nation or freedom. In some special cases an article about an essential piece of slang may be appropriate.
Due to the many AfDs which are initiated to enforce this policy and due to the resistance to such deletion by defenders of the glossaries, I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Slang glossaries to rewrite the policy in order to solve this problem and to readdress this question: should slang glossaries by allowed on Wikipedia? --List Expert 23:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
