Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Management by perkele

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 00:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Management by perkele

del nonnotable foreign-language neologism. mikka (t) 02:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as neologism. --Ter e nc e Ong 04:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the guideline, if it has a decent amount of google hits, there is realistic evidence of usage. Further, there are far more google hits for the original-language version of the term. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 14:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've changed my vote to keep. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has 48 unique google hits in English pages mikka (t) 20:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Oscar Arias 05:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom MLA 09:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable enough to cross borders and countries and gain 420 direct hits. May be a new term and therefore a neologism but no less important than Management by objectives and other similar entries VirtualSteve 11:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It has 48 unique google hits in English pages mikka (t) 20:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep notable in the countries in question - 420 google hits for the english version of the phrase alone. Also, quite interesting and informative. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 14:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It has 48 unique google hits in English pages mikka (t) 20:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep, perkele! This expression is very notable in both Finland and Sweden. There's more to Wikipedia than the USA, you know. JIP | Talk 14:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a good point - to delete this would be an affront to Scandinavian wikipedians. It would be offensive, and would discourage people from contributing articles about Scandinavian cultures. Why not just delete the Finland page while we're at it? Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 14:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And another good point is that it is English Wikipedia. The expression has no prominence in English usage. We cannot cover all possible idioms in all lagnuages of the world. mikka (t) 20:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O RLY? Night Gyr 21:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep clear evidence it is notable. Bondegezou 15:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, would appear to be notable. Would like to have the original Swedish form of the expression, though. Smerdis of Tlön 16:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable Funky Monkey 17:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appears to be a term of some usage... at least nobody is trying to assert it is becoming an English language loanword... Out of curiousity, in Sweden, is it actually expressed as "Management by perkele" or is there a phrase is Swedish that is more commonly used?--Isotope23 18:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- As the phrase originated as a Swedish insult of Finnish leadership, I would think the Swedish actually call it "Management by perkele". However they probably mispronounce it as "Management by pärkkele". JIP | Talk 20:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - ...which is better than "Bergele" though... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 00:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve, because this is not an English phrase, even if a widely used Scandinavian buzzword. ProhibitOnions 19:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, at least BJAODNable if not kept. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 00:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC) perkele.[reply]
Strong Keep Notable term. Used in US in certain software engineering circles as illustration of what not to do to succeed. dryguy 00:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, vittuun perkele. // Gargaj 13:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This vote appears to contradict itself... JIP | Talk 13:57, 18 March 2006 (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.