Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macaquitos

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 Transwiki which has already occured, as such I am deleting it and redirecting to Argentina and Brazil football rivalry. Viridae ^Talk 07:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Macaquitos

Article extremely slandering towards Argentinians and completely unsourced - the only footnote links to a very tendentious, non-reliable website. Rsazevedo ^msg 06:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Wikipedia is not censored. Newspaper headline demonstrates notability. --Eastmain (talk) 07:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not about censorship, it is about the asserting the relevance of an article in a serious encyclopedia. The article in question does not provide a source for this "newspaper headline", simply mentions it. This supposed Olé headline is an old urban myth widely circulated in Brazil, which has never been properly proved. Rsazevedo ^msg 15:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 07:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 07:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki/merge - I don't think use of the term in a newspaper necessarily proves a term is individually notable. The term itself probably belongs in Wiktionary, and mentions of its use would best be served in each team's article. There's really no use to have this as its own article. Torc2 (talk) 10:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki/merge per Torc2 unless additional references are found by the end of this AfD.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 15:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While the term is real and belongs in Wiktionary, the usage as defined in the cited article is dubious at best. It is unsourced, unverifiable, and speculative. StudierMalMarburg (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I added some references. See also the article in the Portuguese-language Wikipedia at http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macaquitos --Eastmain (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I searched for macacos at the website of Diario Olé, the newspaper where the headline supposedly appeared. The newspaper's searchable archive is from June 1998 to the present. I found nothing, which suggests that the term has not been used by the paper since June 1998, but doesn't answer the question of whether the headline actually appeared. The other references do seem to agree that the headline was used. --Eastmain (talk) 21:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Eastmain, the article in Portuguese is also nominated for deletion, and considering the votes at the present time it is going to be deleted. As for the other references, they are also speculative -- as I said, this is an "urban legend" widely known in Brazil but which nobody has been able to prove so far. Rsazevedo ^msg 22:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources seem to be sufficient. Perhaps we take a stricter interpretation of NOT CENSORED than some other WPs. notable ethnic insults are notable. DGG (talk) 02:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The sources seem to be sufficient?" So one can just make up a headline and slap it into an article, and it will be considered a properly sourced article? Rsazevedo ^msg 03:38, 4 February 2008 (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.