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.
Stub that only focuses on a word in its LGBT sense and makes no mention to its usage in meme culture and in common slang as a shortened term for boy.
Thanks, (
talk)
10:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
In general, people do not go around using this term as an alternative term for boy, and so it should not be presented that way as some general usage thing in the lead, especially in the lead sentence. To repeat what I stated before when
reverting you the first time on the
WP:Lead sentence, "The term is firmly established within the LGBT community. What sources state that heterosexuals commonly use this term?" You stated, "[C]ommon slang as a shortened term for boy." What reliable source supports that claim? How is the meme usage the primary usage of the term? Like YorkshireLad stated below, "based on a cursory Google, with less sourcing seemingly available discussing the word in the more general meme context." As you know, I reverted your dictionary-sourced definition again. You cited
thisDictionary.com source. Well,
this Dictionary.com source states, "informal [...] a lesbian who adopts a boyish appearance or manner."
CollinsDictionary.comstates, "informal [...] a lesbian who adopts a boyish appearance or manner." Various other dictionary sources state the same. But regardless of what dictionary sources state, it's not uncommon for dictionaries to give plain and/or outdated definitions of terms. As we know, they commonly do...especially since they list different senses, including historical senses, of terms. This is a topic covered by academic sources, not just dictionaries. And per
WP:SCHOLARSHIP, a topic like this should mainly be relying on academic sources. Per
WP:Not a dictionary, even articles about terms should go beyond a dictionary definition. We should be looking at what academic sources state about this topic. And I know what they state about it. They are focused on the LGBT community. And as for popular culture material? See
WP:"In popular culture" content and
WP:Trivia. No Wikipedia article is obligated to have an "In popular culture" section. And, in fact, Wikipedia articles are usually better off without such content. I'll alert
WP:LGBT to this AfD.
Flyer22 Frozen (
talk)
20:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep I'm not seeing a rationale for deletion here, and, as the sources already cited in the article demonstrate, the word seems to pass
WP:GNG based on the LGBTQ+ context alone. The fact that the article didn't cover other uses of the word (the sense in which I've come across it most, though, based on a cursory Google, with less sourcing seemingly available discussing the word in the more general meme context) doesn't seem to be a reason to delete an article about the sense that is well-sourced—and, indeed, the nom has subsequently expanded the article to cover more senses. Merging to
Gender roles in non-heterosexual communities doesn't really work because of the other senses, as now covered.
YorkshireLad ✿ (talk)16:17, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep or merge elsewhere. It appears to me that LoganBlade nominated this article on a
WP:IDON'TLIKEIT basis. Also, he is for having the lead sentence simply define the term as an alternative spelling for boy, with no mention of the very
WP:Due lesbian aspect or the LGBT community in general, and for unduly positioning the popular/meme content ahead of the actual topic.
Flyer22 Frozen (
talk)
20:28, 9 September 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.