User:King of Hearts/Admin coaching/AfD/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macacawitz
This is an article about a name which one person was called, maybe two or three times in one year. Yes there are sources, but it seems like it's too minor for an encyclopedia article. Jaque Hammer (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — --Lambiam 19:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. — --Lambiam 19:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Merge and Redirect to Controversies of the United States Senate election in Virginia, 2006#Allen's Macaca controversy. --Lambiam 19:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Though there is very little info to write about this term, it can be difficult to determine what to redirect it to, and doing so may be controversial per WP:R#HARMFUL. The term was directed against George Allen, but was proclaimed by someone else in an unrelated race. Therefore, I do believe it is best to keep as it's own page, no matter how short. Xyz7890 (talk) 03:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- Redeirect as suggested above. Trim various explanatory original research, such as about mother, unless there are refs which link mother to nickname. Xyz7890, which are other plausible redirect targets? Muslim lo Juheu (talk) 01:51, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- Redirect to George Allen, is not notable enough for a eaparate article. Jonathanwallace (talk) 12:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Nonnotable term. Edison (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable at all.
--Bobbyd2011 (talk) 19:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I think if anything, if there is an article just on the use of the term Macaca, that could be a target. Also the above two "deletes" should be dismissed as WP:JNN and WP:JUSTAVOTE. I still favor keeping. I don't believe "minor" is a good argument favoring deletion (see WP:USELESS); this article I believe was targeted for deletion simply because it is short. There is no minimum length for an article in order to be worthy of inclusion, and the term is notable after all. Xyz7890 (talk) 05:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep This is a frequent nickname used for major political figures with new mentions coming up even today on blogs as he announces his new candidacy. This is in addition to numerous mentions during his 2006 round. Here are a few,[1], [2], [3], [4], etc. Must I go on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiManOne (talk • contribs) 22:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)