Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jau Gwei (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 no consensus. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 16:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jau Gwei

Previously nominated for deletion. This unsourced article is incapable of improvement. The interesting expression is but an unauthoritative definition of the commonly used Cantonese expression to describe flight of street vendors from police. Its use is exclusively in Cantonese and is virtually unknown in the English language, unlike Gweilo. GSearch results in recursive references to WP mirrors and other blogs, none of which are acceptable references. Ohconfucius (talk) 09:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Jau Gwai is generally used term. The term apparently is a very commonly used in Cantonese and is present in couple of research works and books. However it needs an expert in Cantonese language and culture for possible usage in native languages to be evaluated. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 18:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Hawker_(trade)#HK.2FChina. Juzhong (talk) 23:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite 10:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete as far as i'm aware, wikipedia isn't a chinese dictionary. as neither ni hao nor xie xie have articles, why should this? Jessi1989 (talk) 13:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
comment haha whoops. my above comment may make me look like a bit of an idiot but i stand by my original point. i don't think we can have articles about every commonly used cantonese phrase... Jessi1989 (talk) 13:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But since this phrase is part of the street hawker culture in Cantonese-speaking areas, as well as showing up in at least one English-language discussion of the topic, is there a good reason not to merge? Juzhong (talk) 17:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not a Cantonese phrasebook. The fact that finding any English language use of it sparese indicates that it isn't a widely used phrase in English. -- Whpq (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mgm|^(talk) 11:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Juzhong, with the redirect that follows as well. After reading the article, I conclude that it isn't simply about a phrase. It's a way of life within the world of Hong Kong vendors. I don't think there's an equivalent, in American culture, of abandoning a sales stand, even temporarily; unlicensed vendors who have a motor vehicle are more likely to use that as their "stand". A redirect makes perfect sense, and what's here can be added to the other article, if it hasn't been done so already. Mandsford (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2008 (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.