Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shufty

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 delete (WP:SNOW). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shufty

Non-notable neologism KuroiShiroi (contribs) 18:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This entry is much more appropriate for Wiktionary, as it is little more than a dictionary definition. I would recommend merging any relevant info over to wikt:shufty. (It is notable however -- quite a few hits from online dictionaries on Google -- just not appropriate for Wikipedia.) tempodivalse [☎] 19:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a neologism. It looks like a redirect to Digger slang#Second World War will inform not only readers, but editors as well. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 19:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary and therefore, such articles should not exits, perhaps such words can be added to appropriate articles later on. Parvazbato59 (talk) 19:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete as while it is a common British word, and has been in use for many years, there is probably little encycolpedic information that can be written about it. PaulJones (talk) 20:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and it seems unlikely that there will ever be enough information to make this an encyclopedia article. It should be transwikied if possible. TheDude2006 (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete Belongs on wiktionary. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 21:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Definitely a very long established British English word - and already in Wiktionary as 'shufti' which is the spelling I would use. Peridon (talk) 22:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 23:39, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to the Wiktionary - As pointed out by Uncle G, this is not a neologism. It is however a dictionary definition. I would prefer a soft redirect to the Wiktionary entry, or possibly a redirect to Digger slang#Second World War per Uncle G. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 16:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't see why redirect to Digger Slang when it's a British word. The Digger Slang article says it got there from British English, which got it from Arabic. Digger Slang is Australian. Peridon (talk) 18:09, 13 April 2009 (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.