Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuddle duddle

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 keep. (non-admin closure) NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 06:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fuddle duddle[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article covers a single politician's gaff which had little to no lasting impact. No sign that "fuddle duddle" carries any significance beyond this one event, has not entered normal usage. –dlthewave ☎ 04:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seems sufficiently well-referenced, and still referred to in contemporary media. [1] and [2]. At worst could be renamed to be more specific, but I see no need for that. SportingFlyer T·C 04:37, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A phrase that is still referred to nearly 50 years later, well-known to older Canadians (such as myself). That's notability with a fuddling capital N. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:01, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, those were gentler times when we could be so easily shocked by politicians' utterances. Now, we've got Trump. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lots of reliable sources; it's significant to Canada. Toughpigs (talk) 18:55, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I hope you know that this came from the prime minister. SYSS Mouse (talk) 04:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is still being referenced here in Canada, and the phrase was said by the leader of the country at the time. Haseo9999 (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the incident and its lasting impression are extensively covered in every biography of Trudeau available on Google Books. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 14:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make sense to just cover this within our article on Trudeau? –dlthewave ☎`

Keep. As trivial as this may seem to the uninitiated, it really did generate enough coverage to clear WP:GNG — and it did have a lasting impact, as demonstrated by the fact that the current prime minister referenced the incident in a speech 44 years later and people still knew what he was talking about. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2020 (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.