Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glassing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus to delete. Please put the citations in, and I hope that everyone who contributed will keep an eye on this article. - brenneman {L} 06:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glassing

All this article says is that sometimes people in bars fight each other with broken glass. No explanation of whether the term is notable other than one ref. to one film. NawlinWiki 19:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete - as neologism per nom. I enjoy Nawlin's description of the article "sometimes people in bars fight each other with broken glass". Maybe leave as stub with that as the only content? <--joke. Wickethewok 20:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • No vote - Per new sources, though it may still be just a dicdef. Wickethewok 18:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keep it's a notable term and activity outside of Trainspotting. The article is gash though. Artw 21:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I've heard the phrase used (in the UK) for quite some time (even before Trainspotting, to which the article refers), so I don't think it qualifies as a protologism or even a neologism there. The trouble is finding a reliable source for it - there's no such definition in the OED's entry on "glass", and I'm not sure of Wikipedia's policies on slang terms and how to reference them. As slang goes it may be quite localised, probably not a term that's well-known outside the UK. Nevertheless, the article is a bit of mess, and I can't see it becoming much more than a dicdef, so move to Wikitionary only if a good source can be located, otherwise weak delete. ~Matticus TC 21:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: why do we need sources other than the one the article already provides? Does the term's use in a well-known work of literature, which was widely praised for its accurate portrayal of the vernacular, not count as a reliable source for its existence as a slang term? All that's really missing is page references. That notwithstanding, the dicdef issue remains, and I'm not sure I can think of much else to say about it either... — Haeleth Talk 22:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and a movie that simply uses a word in its dialogue is not a source for the concept that the word denotes. A reliable source for this article would describe what glassing actually is and discuss the concept. A quotation is not a reference. Quotations showing a word in use are what Wiktionary articles require. References describing concepts are what Wikipedia articles require. Uncle G 00:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Various conjugations of the verb "to glass" have this meaning in the UK. Quite well known and certainly not a neologism. Still, basically a dicdef. See, for example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/rsod/stories/1.shtml http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=9792006 http://www.wonkette.com/politics/party-crash/team-party-crash-national-press-foundation-awards-dinner-156758.php -- GWO
    • Good work on that research there, GWO. Those really strengthen the case for keeping the article. If someone can use these to expand the article into describing the problem, talking about the steps taken by bars, event organisers, etc. to avoid them and so on, it'll become more than a dicdef too. ~Matticus TC 16:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I echo that praise. There's also http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/64394-print.shtml . Given these sources, which discuss glassing and the political issues surrounding it, it appears that this article can be edited into a proper, referenced, article on the subject that can be more than a perpetual stub. Please put all of the sources that you have found into the article so that editors can use them to expand and clean up the article. Keep. Uncle G 11:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as neologism. Massmato 16:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't think that word means what you think it means -- GWO
  • Keep Its a fairly well known term in the UK, and as Uncle G says, there should be enough information to turn this into a proper referenced article. I seem to remember the Manchester Evening News running a campaign to change the type of glass used in pubs and nightclubs following a series of such incidents. Oldelpaso 17:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I've done a slight expansion and added a couple of refs. Oldelpaso 18:12, 24 July 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.