Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liverpolitan identity: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m ce my comment
Line 15: Line 15:
::This is an outrageous comment. Every single part of the article has been cited and every single citations supports what I have written. Please provide very clear examples of your argument. [[User:Liverpolitan1980|Liverpolitan1980]] ([[User talk:Liverpolitan1980|talk]]) 15:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
::This is an outrageous comment. Every single part of the article has been cited and every single citations supports what I have written. Please provide very clear examples of your argument. [[User:Liverpolitan1980|Liverpolitan1980]] ([[User talk:Liverpolitan1980|talk]]) 15:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting|deletion sorting]] lists for the following topics: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Language|Language]], [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History|History]], and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/England|England]]. '''[[User:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">WC</span>''<span style="color:#999933">Quidditch</span>'']]''' [[User talk:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">☎</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/Wcquidditch|<span style="color:#999933">✎</span>]] 16:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting|deletion sorting]] lists for the following topics: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Language|Language]], [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History|History]], and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/England|England]]. '''[[User:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">WC</span>''<span style="color:#999933">Quidditch</span>'']]''' [[User talk:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">☎</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/Wcquidditch|<span style="color:#999933">✎</span>]] 16:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)</small>
::There's a raft of issues with raised, most of which not associated with each other.
::#Liverpolitan is a valid term, but the term is not hugely popular or common compared to the term Scouser or Liverpudlian or similar. Therefore 90% of the sources are actually generic articles about people from Liverpool rather than supporting the use of the term of "Liverpolitan" or the "Liverpolitan identity". This puts the content into a WP:SYNTH / WP:OR bracket. It really needs a strong supportive independently sourced articles about the Liverpolitan Identity to support it in the first case (I haven't yet read all the sources, but as it isn't No.1 on the list I suspect it doesn't exist). If it didn't exist to start with, it probably shouldn't also be in the original source article.
::#The association with Liverpolitan.co.uk website seems utterly unfounded. There's no associated articles, no attempt to use them as a source, and the only link is the common use of the word "Liverpolitan" between the editor in questions username, and the created page. This is like claiming "Orange sticker" is only here to promote the brand orange.com; and it should be withdrawn as a matter of order.
::This is already on unsound footing, but appreciate Jonathan Deamer trying to tidy it up. [[User:Koncorde|Koncorde]] ([[User talk:Koncorde|talk]]) 17:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:23, 22 March 2024

Liverpolitan identity

Liverpolitan identity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am fixing the formatting of this AfD discussion after Orange sticker's initial nomination. I'm not proposing an action at this stage. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 15:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why has an editor done this without any explanation? Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was typing my reasons while you posted this!
Arguments in article are either uncited, or citations do not support the argument. The word Scouse refers to both the accent and identity of people from Liverpool. This word is not in common use and the citations show this, rather than support the author's argument. There is a website called Liverpolitan (https://liverpolitan.co.uk/) and it is likely that this is an attempt to promote their brand.
Orange sticker (talk) 15:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. this is not an attempt to promote their brand. I am not affiliated in any way to this brand. All citations are provided and have been interpreted exactly how the author wrote them. Remove reference to Liverpolitan magazine if you feel that this is the case. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 15:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an outrageous comment. Every single part of the article has been cited and every single citations supports what I have written. Please provide very clear examples of your argument. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 15:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a raft of issues with raised, most of which not associated with each other.
  1. Liverpolitan is a valid term, but the term is not hugely popular or common compared to the term Scouser or Liverpudlian or similar. Therefore 90% of the sources are actually generic articles about people from Liverpool rather than supporting the use of the term of "Liverpolitan" or the "Liverpolitan identity". This puts the content into a WP:SYNTH / WP:OR bracket. It really needs a strong supportive independently sourced articles about the Liverpolitan Identity to support it in the first case (I haven't yet read all the sources, but as it isn't No.1 on the list I suspect it doesn't exist). If it didn't exist to start with, it probably shouldn't also be in the original source article.
  2. The association with Liverpolitan.co.uk website seems utterly unfounded. There's no associated articles, no attempt to use them as a source, and the only link is the common use of the word "Liverpolitan" between the editor in questions username, and the created page. This is like claiming "Orange sticker" is only here to promote the brand orange.com; and it should be withdrawn as a matter of order.
This is already on unsound footing, but appreciate Jonathan Deamer trying to tidy it up. Koncorde (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]