Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Culturoso

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 (keep). — FireFox • T [10:22, 2 April 2006]

[edit] Culturoso

Non-notable neologism, unsourced, filled with weasel words and most of the references are to trying to prove who invented the word. Even in that case, the page would belong in Wiktionary, but since it is just bad, I don't think they would accept it. Delete. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 05:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• • Hey 'tito' I'd like to lnow what do you mean with 'weasel words' and 'unsourced'. I already posted the RAE and blog links who prove that the word exists, and since racial slurs are also 'weasel words', they should be deleted too, isn't? Please do explain yourself or retire this article from deletion. It hurts no one, it can be improved, that's true and maybe you, in a gesture of greatness and sportmanship could help. Thanks in advance. Batianismo 15:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
    • You can read our article on Weasel words to see what I mean. Also, if the word exists, that doesn't make it qualify for an article, per se. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Thanks! Tito(UTC)xd^{(?!? help us)} 22:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Sorry to see that you're so hell-bent on erasing this word because of personal reasons. I disagree with the weasel word accusation and would suggest future voters, if any, to disregard your accusations and your personal vendetta against us who uploaded and intend to improve this article. Thanks in advance.Batianismo 04:19, 28 March 2006
• Weak transwiki to Wiktionary or delete. The Spanish version is up for deletion as well. This gets plenty of google hits, but Wikipedia (English and Spanish) and Wikcionario are all in the top ten results (not a good sign!) Doesn't seem that verifiable, and article is far more appropriate for wiktionary anyway. Grandmasterka 06:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. And, "In the beggining, its ethimology was despective"? ¿Qué? —This unsigned comment was added by MCB (talk • contribs) 07:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC).

Here we go again. The term is non-intrusive, accepted by the RAE and is listed 20, 000 times in the google.com.mx search engine.

If wiki articles exist for articles ranging from Cartoons to Japanese Anime Costumes, why can't this one exist? Seriously.

Why are you so hell-bent on deleting this article? Mods, this is a personal vendetta carried from Wikipedia.es, please don't delete this article. Thanks.

Batianismo 15:41, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, it was me who posted the stuff above. Before the intolerant fella up there starts complaining. Thanks.

Mods, please remove the deletion warning. Improve the article, don't delete it. The reasons have been listed above and this is only a personal vendetta of sorts because some people feel uncomfortable with the word 'culturoso'. If wiki articles on racial slurs exist, this one should be able to exist, as an endemic word of sorts, at the very least. Thanks in advance. Batianismo 06:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• So, you're implying that we're comfortable with racial slurs but not comfortable with "culturoso", and that's the only reason they're on here? I searched the RAE website and couldn't find anything on this term. Upon further review, though, I'll change my vote to weak keep, because there is a lot of relevant context that I missed. But that kind of accusation doesn't help things. Verifiability is what matters here, and I really doubt anyone here has a personal vendetta against this word. Grandmasterka 07:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• • I'm not implying anything. I'm very sad that the librarians in Wiki.es couldn't act professionally and erased the article (and called 'vandals' all the people who even dared to send the article to consideration) due to personal reasons.

I saw that they also erased the word 'joto', who's a mexican and latinamerican slur for gay people because some person felt uncomfortable with the word. The world knows that I feel uncomfortable being called a beaner or a wetback, but that doesn't mean the word shouldn't be listed there, if all, as a warning notice of intolerance of sorts.

Regarding you not finding the word 'culturoso' in the RAE, I'm sorry and I don't mean this in any disrespectful way, but I did a search in the following adress [1] and found this "culturoso, sa.

1. adj. despect. coloq. Arg., Cuba y Ven. Que aparenta tener alta formación cultural."

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact you're not a native spanish speaker, but the word exists and it's out there and its relevant in Northern Mexico and Southern California, at least.

As for the word popping up in google.com.mx and the 3rd result being the wiki.es article, I read something in that discussion regarding how they were going to link that article (the mods, I mean) so it would be considered for deletion on other wikis. Is that fair? Or a personal vendetta?

I leave that to your consideration.

Improve, don't delete.

I'd like to cast a vote to keep and improve this article, thank you.

Batianismo 15:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep It's a valuable article and I personally will see that the article is improved. Thanks in advance.Batianismo 15:41, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WINAD, insufficiently sourced (WP:V); one source is not direct, one is a blog, and one uses the word exactly once in I don't know what context. Sandstein 08:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and Batianismo, please review WP:AGF. Sandstein 08:36, 1 April 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.