Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kebab Norwegian

Add links
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 was keep. The only person arguing for deletion is the nominator. There appear to be some useful leads in the comments/keeps which might be worth following up and using to improve the article PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kebab Norwegian[edit]

Kebab Norwegian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looked over the provided link in the article (google scholar search) gave 10 results, and I noticed only one source to be somewhat relevant, although that source can't be trustworthy in that matter, as such definition should appear in other mainstream dictionaries. Others include such as this. Doesn't seem to have any weight, most likely it's just known amongst some norwegian street groups who refer to immigrants that are from these countries in such a way. Libelous article, and I have no doubt "kebab" here isn't used in a good sense. Let alone that it bears no encyclopedic value rather than an attack to a group of immigrants (I don't think Kurds, Arabs, Pashtuns, Persians, Punjabis, Turks are fancying this term being referred to them) and the article is just so short (and has 4 contributed edits, mainly by the creator of this article) which are minor per se, as being said - the article is very short). Maybe it will fit into some special related article, but definitely not as a separate one. On a sidenote: If the author haven't tried to apply this term as if it's an official term there, in Norway, I would take it as some mad joke. Userpd (talk) 23:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll probably have better luck googling for "kebabnorsk", as works on this topic seems to have been written mostly in Norwegian. Ters (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide a proof that it's an officially applied term / definition in Norway? Also, 58 hits per this keyword is low. Note, that in search result is included blogs / commentaries on sites where this word has been met. Userpd (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As the article says, out of political correctness, linguists prefer to use more general terms. But the no.wikipedia article gave some additional info. There was a thesis by that name 15 years ago, by Stine Aasheim, which appears to be the source of the name. Here's an Aftenposten article on the phenomenon, referring to it, dated 18 March 2010. There is also the dictionary referred to in the article: Andreas Eilert Østby, Kebabnorsk ordbok, Gyldendal, 2005, ISBN 82-05-33910-4: OCLC listing. (No preview on GoogleBooks.) The no.wikipedia article lists the following additional sources: Another Aftenposten article, dated 26 January 2002; a blog posting/editorial by a journalist at forskning.no (an academic news site) dated 10 December 2010 (. . . and a link that's so blocked I can't even put it here in plain text and that in any case appears to be dead). I think that's enough for notability. I find it interesting that the no.wikipedia article claims the term was coined by analogy with kebabsvenska, which was used by speakers of the analogous Swedish argot in the 1990s - Aasheim's thesis doesn't appear to have been published so that may be hard to verify - yet the Swedish article it is wikilinked to makes no mention of anything like that and instead says it's the Norwegian equivalent of Rinkeby Swedish. However, whatever the unsettled academic status of the lingo, I believe the journalistic coverage plus the published dictionary and the blog post (and any other academic articles there may be - I haven't looked yet) are adequate to make it notable. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've now referenced up the article and rewritten it a tad. I found more material. Aasheim's thesis, or a paper based on it, was published in the proceedings of a conference, and there has been TV coverage of the phenomenon and a film featuring teenagers speaking it. Plus one of the Google scholar hits discusses it in the context of ethnolects. So the article now demonstrates notability quite clearly. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Searching for the ISBN listed for the book given as a source at no:Kebabnorsk finds no such book, at least in the three catalogs I searched. One of the external links (kebabnorsk.co.cc) appears to be dead, leaving the two external sources noted by Yngvadottir as potential sources. I did find a citation for the thesis mentioned at no:Kebabnorsk, but it appears to be an unpublished MA thesis. Aasheim, Stine Cecilie. (1995). "Kebab-norsk" Fra-mandsprakleg paverknad pa ungdomsspraket i Oslo. M.A. thesis. Oslo. Cnilep (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I must have type the ISBN incorrectly or something; Yngvadottir's link to WorldCat finds it just fine. Cnilep (talk) 23:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - Yngvadottir above shows that there has been some academic coverage of this phenomenon, and mention in reliable sources, but not very much. As it is, I think this just about passes the notability guideline. I would say that I think calling it 'libellous', an 'attack on immigrants' and 'a mad joke', as the nominator did, isn't very helpful; I see no indication that this article wasn't created in good faith. If the name is objectionable, it could be moved to Norwegian multiethnolect or something similar, but this does seem to be the most widely-used name for it. Robofish (talk) 22:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Reliable Sources?" He has provided only one: aftenposten.no, that doesn't point out notability, however, it has to appear on several mainstream sources. Which is not the case here. Newspapers write about a lot of things, and the second link in Yngvadottir's comment, links to a blog on this site, and as you know blogs aren't welcomed to be used as sources, unless it's written by a notable columnist / writer etc. Userpd (talk) 17:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And what about the book on this subject published by Gyldendal? That is certainly a reliable source. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did a search with A-tekst, a closed search tool for Norwegian newspapers, and got 203 hits. Looking through the first results I found several newspaper articles that could be used to source and expand this article. Examples include:
    • Blod og babes på Holmlia - Snakker kebabnorsk med venner... - Aftenposten Morgen - 22.12.2010 - p. 6
    • Kebabnorsk, bra for språket - Dagsavisen - 28.02.2005 - p. 22
    • Misliker kebabnorsk - Romerikes Blad - 17.12.2010 - p. 44
    • Kjærlighet på kebabnorsk - Dagsavisen - 22.10.2007 - p. 40
Rettetast (talk) 22:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up comment Thanks for the search, Rettetast. I'll have a look and see whether they add usefully to what I've already put in the article, if you haven't already added them. I suspect the second citation may be identical to the one I got from the academic site blog. Regarding that, it's similar to a blog attached to the Chronicle of Higher Education - it's on an academic research news site. It's not a self-published blog. Regarding alternate terms, as the article notes, it's generally called that, although speakers have been saying in recent years that it's now being used more pejoratively. But that's still the most recognisable term for it; I can't see any justification for us being more polite than the news reports and renaming the article, although if no.wikipedia ever does, that would weigh heavily. One point I noticed is the wide span of time covered by the newspaper cites; this is still being discussed. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this has been the issue of innumerable public debate and has made its way into scientific research and has been the subject of several published research papers. For instance, [1] and [2] are both media coverage of scientific work on the language. There is also a dictionary published (ISBN 82-05-33910-4) by one of Norway's main publishing houses; this book alone should seal this discussion. On a more informal note, most Norwegians are familiar with the term kebabnorsk and know what it refers to; it is spoken by a significant portion of the population and is real, making it just as notable as any other dialect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsenikk (talk • contribs) 21:20, 20 February 2011
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kebab_Norwegian&oldid=1137967245"