Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mule (slang)

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 of the debate was delete; no keep votes from established Wikipedians. Chick Bowen 18:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mule (slang)

Neologism; no verifiable usage given beyond a blog which does not meet WP:RS. --BillC 20:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

  ATTENTION!

If you came to this page because a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum asking you to do so, please note that this is not a vote on whether or not this article is to be deleted. It is not true that everyone who shows up to a deletion discussion gets an automatic vote just for showing up.

The deletion process is designed to determine the consensus of opinion of Wikipedia editors; for this reason comments from users whose histories do not show experience with or contributions to Wikipedia are traditionally given less weight and may be discounted entirely.

Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

You are not barred from participating in the discussion, no matter how new you may be, and we welcome reasoned opinions and rational discussion based upon our policies and guidelines. However, ballot stuffing is pointless. There is no ballot to stuff. This is not a vote, and decisions are not made upon weight of numbers alone. Furthermore, the presence of many new users in discussions like this one has made some editors in the past more inclined to suggest deletion. Please review Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more information.

More like YOU'RE teribble stuff! Deletionists are not to be trusted (see Enron). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.145.58.251 (talk • contribs)

  • Delete per nomination. I was expecting an article about drug mules, and that's not what I got. --Metropolitan90 02:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete it! The term mule is a brilliant one and the mulish legacy will live on in New England forever. Can you not see the picture with Andrew WK Performing the mule sign? (For the record, the kid next to him can also be known as "Trudy The Mulicorn"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.230.27 (talk • contribs)
  • Don't Delete It! The term "mule" is something very important here. The article is perfect! We love mules. YOU are a mule and if this article is deleted that's very un-mule of whoever is in charge. Another mule story is that the now deceased ska band The Eskapade used to post a picture of a mule on their mic stand and during guitar solos the crowd would all make the mule hand sign. To delete this article would be very sad, please leave it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.186.38 (talk • contribs)
  • The fact that there are several different usages of the term (as mentioned above) in no way invalidates the use of this entry. There is already an article about drug mules; I don't see that this article conflicts with that. To the contrary, it is most useful to have a comprehensive definition. Don't negate the validity of a local term just because it's not from your locality.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.251.191.50 (talk • contribs)
    I'm sure plenty of people use it, but it's not verifiable. I could write an article just as long with just as many celebrity mentions about my local variation of the word (and with reliable sources, to boot, since it's used that way by a radio DJ who has received national press). It still wouldn't be encyclopedic, though. — AKADriver ☎ 16:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
So go ahead and write that article and none of us will complain about it. The term MULE in the sense that we're talking about is important.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.186.38 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete. It's just an exceptionally long dictionary definition at best. Fluit 16:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

DON'T DELETE THIS - mule is in every sense a huge part of the New England youth vernacular. When I think of my high school experience in New England I think of the Red Sox, Cape Cod, Dropkick Murphys, and MULES. Please keept his entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.181.114 (talk • contribs)

As the original creator of this article, I feel that given the youth culture associations of the term (the hand-sign, the particular celebrities thought to be examplary) place it beyond the purview of a dictionary. Wikipedia does have an entry on the devil horns. Admittedly, millions of people know that sign, while only hundreds know this one. Nonetheless, it's legitimate and accurate. Obscure, but legitimate. To delete it would simply be to make the Wikipedia less complete. There are two external links here. Avery Score was not a blogger for Gamespot, he was a columnist, with over 300 articles credited to him. The Eskapade page is not a blog either; it's the homepage of an established band. I understand the counterarguments, but I respectfully disagree with them. Peter Smith, 27 April 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turbomcphazer (talk • contribs)

  • DO NOT DELETE. Seeing as Wikipedia has articles on other slang, subcultures, and symbols, I do not find a reason to exclude this. People come to Wikipedia to learn more about many things. The internet and even Wikipedia itself could be construed as a subculture with just as many slang words and symbols/icons. Why would you neglect something similar just because you haven't heard of it? If people can't learn about something new what is the use of an encyclopedia anyways? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.142.185 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. --phh (t/c) 21:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
    • It wasn't just "made up one day." It's a term that comes from a point in history, a point in history that continues to this day. To remove this article would be not only an injustice to this mere "slang" word, but an injustice to all that is free and fun in this world. 24.60.186.38 07:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)LOVE

Good point. Unfortunately one fact shoots a hole ithrough your argument: a term such as this could not -possibly- be made up in school one day. Or made up in school over the course of several days. What muledom is and what it stands for is as organic as soy milk: hearty, earthy and completely un-squalid. Something so un-squalid, in fact, that it must be experienced to be believed. But you're all mules, we know this, and we have faith in you to do the right thing. In summary: Wikipedia -IS- for things formed -organically- through -life- over the course of -experience-! 05:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC) St. Alexi the camera-man.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.44.231 (talk • contribs)

  • delete round here "mule (slang)" might be an insult implying sterility and poor ancestry, or it may mean a dugrunner... this is far more made up in school one day. Pete.Hurd 05:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • While I'm not familiar with the term the fact that Andrew W.K. is in the picture doing this so-called mule sign or salute gives some credence to the term. Bmortimer 02:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Please Do Not DeleteI first heard the term 'mule' in the greater Boston area in the late 1990s. I'm not sure that the usage can be found in any major print publication, but if you visit any Boston-area highschool, you're bound to come across some 'mules.' The same could have been said of the term 'wicked pissah' when it first appeared, perhaps as long ago as the mid-1970s. Now the term is practically a cultural phenomenon. I believe it's in Wikipedia's best interest to keep this definition available. Thanks. ~~ C. Tobajas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.91.252 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment It's not even in Urban Dictionary. You can add it there if you like, though you should understand that that action would make no difference to this debate, as Wikipedia does not recognise Urban Dictionary as a reliable source. If you want to save this entry, what is required is some well-sourced usages: is a syndicated columist using it in a respected newspaper, for example? If, as someone on this page has claimed, it is a word or sign that "only hundreds know", forget it, it's neither notable, encyclopaedic nor reliably sourced. --BillC 00:27, 2 May 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.