Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beach bunny

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. The "keep" opinion by MoonLichen makes no sense in terms of Wikipedia policy, and that by Greg Comlish is unpersuasive in view of WP:BURDEN. Transwiki or merge is also not possible with zero sources. Whether to redirect is an editorial decision. Sandstein 06:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beach bunny

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

Unreferenced substub on non notable slang term. No assertion of notability. No sources. Wikipedia is not a slang dictionary. Contested prod; prod removed by new SPA created for the express purpose of removing prods. The Hero of This Nation (talk) 02:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Slang dictionary definition. Wikipedia is not Urban Dictionary. Carrite (talk) 03:47, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What have we become? Look down at your hands, the ones typing these words full of vitriol. Are they hands that create and build? Are they hands that caress and nurture? Or are they hands that destroy? No, my friends, of course you are not destroyers. You don't want to delete these articles. It's not you. It's not who you are. --MoonLichen (talk) 04:12, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do like the picture of two women at the Jersey shore. One doesn't ordinarily think of "beach bunnies" as being an east coast thing, I found that enlightening... Carrite (talk) 16:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Transfer to Wictionary (if that combination makes sense). Google searches seem to use it as a brand name of swimwear-- which is not the point of the article. Wictionary is the place for defining terms, not here. Wabbott9 (talk) 04:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The term has been used in passing for decades, but I have not been able to find any reliable sources that discuss the topic in depth. By the way, I am looking at my hands, and they are typing thoughts that convey Wikipedia policy rather than any vitriol. Cullen328 (talk) 05:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Surfing culture. Borock (talk) 10:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It is a perfectly good slang term, but that doesn't mean that it belongs outside of Wictionary. I agree with Gene93k, there doesn't seem to be any difference between beach bunny culture and surfing culture. This is emphasized by the inability to find substantive discussion of beach bunnies in non trivial publications. --Bejnar (talk) 16:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Beach bunny culture is clearly distinct from surfer culture. This article needs citations, but it can and should be fixed. Greg Comlish (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary. While it's clear that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion for terms that should be defined there, I have not been able to find any in-depth coverage of beach bunnies in reliable sources - indeed I'm struggling to find in-depth coverage in unreliable sources also. Thryduulf (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I wonder how old the use is, since online sources of its origin seem sparse. I can find a 1952 reference to model Bunny Yeager titled "Beach Bunny", so its clear it was in use by that point.[1]. I'm not convinced its not notable, because we went through the same thing with Guido (slang), but this is harder.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 20:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The oldest a quick google books search finds is [2] from a 1959 magazine. The context makes it clear that the readership is expected to know and understand the term. Thryduulf (talk) 11:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ahh, that google date is deceptive, as they sometimes are for "books" which compile periodicals. That entry is for a 1986 episode of Silver Spoons. This 1964 reference[3] in Boy's Life magazine though, shows its a valid term in surfing culture at that point.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 14:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect My preference would be to redirect to Beach#Beaches and recreation. It seems like this section could then be expanded into its own article. The original beach article could primarily serve as a discussion of the beach as a geological feature. A separate article, maybe called beach (recreation), could include reference to beach bunnies, but also sunbathing, beach volleyball, swimming, sandcastles, surfing, etc. Currently, no such page exists, even though it would seem to logical to include. In fact, sunbathing currently redirects to sun tanning, which isn't exactly the same thing. One seems recreational, whereas the other seems cosmetic (hence, tanning booths, etc). A new page could at least highlight this type of activity as well as address the current nomination. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2011 (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.