Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of surfing terminology

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 keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of surfing terminology

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

This is the sort of unreferenced list cruft that belongs on Wikia not Wikipedia. Bob Re-born (talk) 01:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems like a reasonable enough topic, and could be referenced since I'm sure this info is published in various places. Kitfoxxe (talk) 01:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but only if additional, non-commercial sources found. This article would be very useful, but the single source listed seems dubious to this outsider. 78.26 (talk) 06:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia contains numerous glossaries of this sort. We might change the title but deletion would not be appropriate. Warden (talk) 07:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:07, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I can definitely feel the unease about it in its current state (and smell the suspicion of anyone wanting to review the veracity of such a list) - the whole ambit of information of surfing and its terminology on wikipedia is calling out for a level headed hard work editing to a more universal and better referenced set of articles and lists - maybe this is a starting point for someone to improve the lot?.. Satu Suro 10:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was going to believe that this list did not meet WP:NOTESAL requirements because the only sources for the terms were blogs and forums, ie. not reliable sources. However this search [1] revealed a variety of published sources that include glossaries of surfing terms. Thus WP:NOTESAL requirements are met. Someone needs to add these sources to the article. Clean it up from a WP:SAL MOS perspective and it should be renamed Glossary of surfing to better comply with WP:LIST. I will withhold judgement until this happens. --Mike Cline (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as the article is notable and already contains useful information. It could use improvement, but that will come in time per WP:CHANCE. Mamyles (talk) 14:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Should be improved with reliable sources, not deleted. As can be seen by Category:Glossaries on sports articles like this are not "cruft", but are perfectly acceptable. I do agree with Mike that it should probably be renamed to Glossary of surfing, though. Jenks24 (talk) 12:17, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources added that demonstrate notability IAW WP:NOTESAL, all the entries need to be verified against sources but that's clean-up. Most of not all are verifiable. Requested Move made to Glossary of surfing. --Mike Cline (talk) 14:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with a move to Glossary of surfing. Surfing has its own particular subculture, and the terms they use are very specific. A dictionary as a source would be a blessing, but probably hard to come by. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:12, 4 November 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.