Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DQN

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No Consensus/Keep. R e dwolf24 (talk) 02:31, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DQN[edit]

Should be moved to Wiktionary or deleted. Reason: Wikipedia is not a dictionary Zerofoks | Talk 07:55:45, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

Delete appears to be website-specific slang. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:55, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Agree with above. Fernando Rizo T/C 17:05, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. DQN is the Japanese equivalent of luser and is widely used in Japanese internet culture. - Thatdog 04:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that article does not abide by Wikipedia's policies, either, or does it? zerofoks 14:16:58, 2005-08-15 (UTC)

Keep I found this article useful, with all the places where people use "DQN" many people do not know what it means. Not "website-specific slang." --richjkl 20:24, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is not "website-specific slang", however my objection regarding Wikipedia's policies still stands. Would you say that it is somehow invalid in this case? zerofoks 20:52:02, 2005-08-15 (UTC)

Relisting on August 23. I'm leaning towards delete but I only count about two valid votes in the above. Too many newcomers and suspected socks. Five more days. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 19:37, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have we got a "Japanese online slang" article to redirect this to? Otherwise, delete. Also commend Tony for handling this VfD like this. --fvw * 19:42, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
PS: I've discussed this with User:Thatdog and agree with him that I was probably applying criteria too aggressive for this kind of discussion. I probably would have closed this with keep if I had counted his vote. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 22:35, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. First Post and other catchphrases that have website-specific origins and have their own articles. However, a redirect to 4chan or 2ch could work fine, since that's where some other of their memes are listed.
Keep more than just a dict-def. --TimPope 21:51, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's an article about the meaning, usage and origins of a word or phrase. That's a dictionary definition. Transwiki to Wiktionary and delete from Wikipedia. (I would also accept endorse the content with the soft redirect, Template:Wi.) Rossami (talk) 22:50, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Notably source and then trans-wiki per Rossami. JDoorjam 01:45, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ja:DQN redirects to ja:2ちゃんねる用語, we could do the same and merge to 2ch. --zippedmartin 02:25, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 2ch per zippedmartin. I'm sure the Japanese know best about their own language. R adiant _>|< 07:23, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Comment If deleted, please make sure to redirect it to a page where the phrase is easy to spot. I've seen this article often refered to when the frequently asked question "What is DQN?" shows up. This is not a 2ch specific phrase. -- 129.241.146.239 17:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Merge 2ch - This is IMPOSSIBLE to find anywhere else on the internet. I found this article by sheer force of luck. It's also a really powerful, popular meme like first post, or pwn Gamera2 08:50, 28 August 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.