Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kazakh profanity

:{{la|Kazakh profanity}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kazakh_profanity Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Kazakh profanity}})

WP:NOT a foreign language dictionary. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• Delete - Why the hell anyone would wanna create this crap is beyond me!, Nothing of encyclopedic value so delete. –Davey2010^Talk 01:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - NOT Legacypac (talk) 05:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOTDIC. Immature as it is unencyclopedic.--NortyNort (Holla) 23:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• Comment, there are quite a few of these articles, per :Category:Profanity by language. Would those participating in this discussion deem every article in this category non-notable? This is something to think about, because most of these deletion comments are very weak. Tavix |  Talk  08:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• Just because we have other article on profanity doesn't mean we necessarily need to keep this one. Finnish profanity, for example, is encyclopedic and covers the history, background and/or origins of Finnish profanity. The subject article here appears to just translate common profanity and give an overview of how often/acceptable Kazakh profanity occurs/is. Every country/ethnicity swears but an article on it should be encyclopedic. I also cannot understand much of the "...modern days" section.--NortyNort (Holla) 14:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

::I am aware of OTHERSTUFF EXISTS, but all I'll say is that we have :Category:Profanity by language for a reason and dozens of other articles like this, I don't see why the Kazakh language is any less worthwhile than the others. In its current format it doesn't seem encyclopedic though, and some of the entries in the table do look like somebody having some childish fun with some of the phrases. I do think it's possible to create something a bit more sophisticated! It needs an overhaul and wider sourcing to be worthwhile, like the Finnish one.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

• Delete as a set of dictionary entries: This has word, transliteration, meaning, sample uses and etymology. The handful of vague notes on Kazakh uses of profanity do not change this. However, writing a better article on the subject should be encouraged, and this would be part of that article. No objection. therefore, to recreation, or keeping this text in user-space. The closing admin should ask for people to host it, starting with Tavix. I'd be willing to, if necessary. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:54, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:DICDEF. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

::If WP:DICDEF really applied we'd have to delete hundreds of articles including my entry on Hooray Henry. It is possible to write something encyclopedic about terms, however, this current entry has no place on here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

• Comment. The present version is a childish list of forbidden words. It relies on one source, a dictionary, and is original research unless the dictionary says these terms are profane. That is irrelevant. The question is whether the subject has encyclopedic potential. If so, it should be tidied up and then expanded. Are there good sources that discuss the subject in some depth? Does profanity play a special role in Kazakh culture? Claims of "obscenity" are sometimes used for political censorship. Would that apply or have applied in Kazakhstan? Are there famous real or fictional examples? Borat? We need a Kazakh-speaker to inform us whether the sources exist. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:37, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

: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.