Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McWords

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 of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. — JIP | Talk 17:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

McWords[edit]

Article is simply a list of words starting with a particular prefix (Mc-) and does not provide a solid basis or context for justifying encyclopedic status (cultural context, etc.). Delete Bumm13 19:30, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete McListcruft. - Just zis Guy, you know? 20:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Expand. This has possibility, once it's expanded. McDonald's is certainly a major cultural issue, and if expanded - specifically info on social implications of a "McDonald's culture", the page could be really good. Janet13 21:12, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup. Not only is McDonald's a cultural issue, sometimes people use the prefix "Mc-" to mean something more broad -- about the consumerism of something. --Jacqui ^★ 23:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Janet13. Denni ☯ 03:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
RENAME to McLanguage 132.205.45.148 18:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup per Janet13. --Avery W. Krouse 07:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
LEAVE THE ARTICLE THE WAY IT IS No more Vandlisim to a super great article 216.77.193.150 15:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This is a poor article. 1. There is not a single reference (see WP:V). 2. Most of the entries violate WP:NOR; many are neologisms. 3. The title is itself a neologism. It also likely does not accord with WP:MoS (singular preferred). If you remove all the neologisms, you'd have a handful of legitimate entries, such that I'm not convinced of the need for a separate page to list them. Why not list the legit entries in each of the legit "Mc-" articles, under "See also"? That way the readers who're actually interested in these phenomena have a much better chance of finding the legit entries, compared with the situation where they are tucked away on a separate page—under a neologism. The legit entries that I see are McDonaldization, McJob, McWorld, McLibel case, McMurder, McMansion, and probably McDojo. Someone interested in any of these will likely type in that word and get to the article, where they can be pointed to related phenomena that might interest them. If I wanted to read about the McLibel case I would not search for "McWords." For these reason, delete. encephalon 14:25, 3 November 2005 (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.