Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cock block

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (nice try, cock blockers) · Katefan0^(scribble) 03:23, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cock block

This is a neologism, an earlier version has been transwikied to Wiktionary - wiktionary:transwiki:Cock block. This doesn't count as a speedy for recreation as it is much more extensive than previously, however it is still only a definition. Thryduulf 19:21, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

• keep notable social phenomenon with decent article; 47,000 google hits. — brighterorange (talk) 19:58, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Delete since official policy at WP:NOT states that wikipedia is not a slang guide. -- (☺drini♫|☎) 20:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I admit to being somewhat out of the mainstream in my position on dicdefs, but I think that WP:NOT permits this article even under a reasonably conservative interpretation. The article is not a mere definition of the term, and it is not a usage guide. WP:NOT does not exclude articles with slang titles (especially if that is the best term for the subject of the article) nor articles about new "low" cultural phenomena. In my mind, this is a pretty notable one with 47,000 googles and numerous pop culture uses—definitely the kind of thing that someone might want to look up—and the article is decent. — brighterorange (talk) 20:46, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Comment. "Cock block" is not a slang term in the sense that it is a colloquialism that replaces a formal term, i.e. "rock" for "basketball", or "grom" for "young surfer". I would argue that "cock block" is the only concise term in English for a situation where one's friend is trying to flirt with a girl and is interfered with by another friend. It is definitely a phrase that is in wide use in the United States, and is perhaps the best term to describe a common social situation. So now the questions in my mind are:

1. Can references be cited for "cock-blocking"?
2. Is the subject itself encyclopedic?

I don't know yet. Fernando Rizo T/C 20:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Four days later, still no references. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:28, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep very widespread useage, as User:Fernando Rizo pointed out, it isn't a cultural synonym for a more formal word, it is a phrase in and of itself. -GregAsche (talk) 22:00, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
• This is not a neologism, it's a well-known slang term, but there isn't much more that can be said than what is said here, transwiki to Wiktionary and delete. User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:10, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
• Any catchy slang phrase that is used by young people nowadays is going to end up all over the internet with a jillion google hits. WP:NOT Urbandictionary. Neologism or not, delete, at most this is worthy of listing alongside other contemporary slang terms. Paul 03:00, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Dictionary definition. --FOo 05:57, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• keep please this is not a dictionary definition and we have a bunch of these at category sexual slang so this should be here too Yuckfoo 07:35, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. As noted, this is not a neologism. It is a dicdef, and as is typical for dicdefs that end up on AFD, a completely unsourced one. Quale 02:51, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Cock-blocker!!! Whooo-hoo. -- BD2412 ^talk 17:12, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as a dicdef. Joyous (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This is not just a dictionary definition. It describes a concept that is sufficiently noteworthy to be included in an encyclopedia.--Grouse 19:03, 18 September 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.