Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English-language euphemisms for profanities

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 was delete. postdlf (talk) 17:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of English-language euphemisms for profanities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTDICT, this kind of list belongs on wiktionary Prisencolin (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - If we had enough stand-alone articles dedicated to terms on the list, it might make a little bit of sense, but although it claims "notable" as part of the inclusion criteria, it sees that's either based on WP:OR or based on some Wiktionary sense of notability (which certainly is not the same as here). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Completely unsourced, and so by definition original research. --MelanieN (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2016 (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.