Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egoboo

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, so keep. -Splash^talk 01:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Egoboo

Usenet slang. That's very non-notable in real world terms and it's a crystal clear dicdef. Ergo, delete. Peter ^Isotalo 20:36, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete unless Wiktionary wants it. Slang term. But I've heard the term used in non-Internet contexts. Zoe 22:04, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Wiktionary doesn't have an entry for "egoboo". The term used to be common in hobby where people published fanzines, such as science fiction fandom and postal Diplomacy (game). Its general noteworthiness is questionable enough that I could accept this article either being deleted or kept after transwikification. Barno 00:06, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Please, please don't vote to keep it. This will only result in a very good excuse for every imaginable kind of slang being kept. We're seriously burdened by young white (American) male geek cruft as it is without turning into a ethnological-etymological dictionary of Usenet slang. And, no, balancing with non-notable slang from other population groups won't make it more viable. / Peter ^Isotalo 06:47, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Notable to sf fen perhaps but when would a mundane hear it? Consider redirect (and merge brief info) to Fanspeak or Fanzine

(no vote at this time, just suggesting alternatives.) - WCFrancis 02:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I wonder if we have enough examples scattered around to split a list off from fanspeak and discuss etymologies and so forth there? Fanspeak only has three-four examples, but it's an interesting set of subcultural phrases and could probably form quite an interesting article in a jargon-filish way; the word-blending habit, for example, is quite noticeable. Shimgray 15:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

• I do find it somewhat amusing that the only page I've ever had VFDed is one that gets put up after I've corrected it... It's pre-Usenet slang, and not significantly used there - couple of thousand hits - so nn usenet slang is a bit of a misrepresentation. Borderline as per Barno whether it's notable or not (though it's interesting to see that it spread into fanzines generally); if it is deleted don't see any reason not to transwiki it. It's not a term I'd particularly use, though I encounter it relatively often, but am loathe to claim notability through that... hrm. Hrm hrm hrm.

Another Comment re: last. Egoboo did not spread to sf fanzines from Usenet; usage predates internet by decades. - Old Fart FanWCFrancis 20:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

• (Oh, and slippery slope - have you looked at the slang cats recently? If someone wants to cite an excuse for keeping anything they come up with, they have more than enough there already...) Shimgray 12:58, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I believe Wiktionary that states that words have to have been used in running texts for more than a year, so I think this would be accepted and I'm not going to comment on whether that's appropriate or not. I'm aware of the slang inconsistency, but I hope that words like blatte won't be used as a rhetorical bat in these discussion. Does anyone else think that this is worth making a centralized discussion like those about conlangs or all those B (?) roads in the UK? / Peter ^Isotalo 14:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I wasn't intending to do the "if you keep X, you must have Y" thing... (the one I was thinking of is STFG, incidentally); as far as centralised discussions go, hmm. I'm not sure we really have enough "slang discussions" to warrant it. (VFDs on plain and simple definitions tend to be clear-cut, ones with a little more detail about a colloquial phrase less so). Shimgray 15:06, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep iff it is expanded. This is not Usenet slang; it is a term and phenomenon in sf fandom. --FOo 23:38, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Hogwash. It's specific Usenet and Internet-nerd slang and claiming that "excitement through the achievement of a free service" is unique of "sf fandom" is such a narrow view that it has to be viewed as pure and unadultarated POV. / Peter ^Isotalo 07:44, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

• Note the sourcing provided in the current version of the article, in which the definition reads: rush received from public recognition of a free contribution, probably derived from "ego boost". ("Rush" is not the right word, but "excitement"doesn't fit either. Nor does "Pride"fit the meaning.) I have not claimed that it was exclusively used in SF jargon, and I don't think anyone else said that either. I meant that it is in wide use in fandom and has been for many years, according to references around fifty years. To say that it is specific to Usenet could be considered to be a narrow view that if it does not exist on the internet, it does not exist. (I don't think anyone meant that either, but it could be taken that way.) Remember, many SF fans are also usenet/internet fans... Like me.

I have not voted on this issue, just made extensive comments. But the arguments opposed to keeping it are convincing me of more notability than I expected it would have. Still no vote. - WCFrancis 16:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

• Rewritten a chunk again - sorry, Peter, but I think I'll finally vote to Keep. I've mulled this over for a couple od days, and I'm just not convinced it's on the wrong side of the line. Shimgray 23:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I've finally decided, on the basis that Wikipedia is not paper. Although I still think it could be effectively merged into Fanspeak. -WCFrancis 19:58, 16 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.