Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Backhanded compliment (2nd nomination)

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 merge to Insult. Courcelles 01:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Backhanded compliment

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

From removed PROD: Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article consists only of a definition and does not tell why this phrase is Notable. Illia Connell (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Cnilep (talk) 06:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDIC (or possibly merge to insult). DoctorKubla (talk) 08:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is one of the least inane of the articles that deserve to be deleted per nom. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there seems little potential for this article to evolve beyond a dictionary definition without veering into the minefield of original research Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 10:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to insult. Killer Chihuahua 10:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Insult. I also don't think this is expandable past a dictionary definition without resorting to original research, but the title would make a perfectly good search term and the Insult article could do with some content about backhanded compliments, so a merge is preferable to deletion. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 16:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not the Urban Dictionary.--Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 01:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Insult. That page currently mentions "deformed compliment signals" as part of a typology (or "anatomy") of insults, but includes nothing beyond those three words. Cnilep (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.