Talk:Short bus

Deletion nomination[edit]

Short bus[edit]

What is in this article can be best placed in the articles, for Minibus and Midibus. In addition, a definition for a slang term may belong in the Wiktionary project, but not the Wikipedia project.

The proposal is for a deletion and redirect to Minibus.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Is it inflamatory?[edit]

The end of the article is rather insulting and unnecessary. What purpose does including all of the offensive and slang terms serve? I know that Wikipedia is not censored, but at the same time, we don't go around and add things like "Britney Spears is also somtimes referred to as a "skank, slut, piece of trash," etc. It just seems a little unnecessary and innappropriate. Should we also add "Children sufferring from Down's Syndrome are sometimes called idiots, retards, etc." I certainly hope not. Anybody see my point? Wikipediarul e s 2221 17:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not insulting anyone. It is defining the term and stating facts about common usage of the word, which go far beyond what could be found in a dictionary, just like the wikipedia articles on Nigger, Kike, Cunt, etc. If those articles should stay, then clearly so should this. 130.126.246.122 05:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those articles make some effort at providing content above and beyond a list of synonyms and a fake story. If you want to take some time and research this topic, by all means feel free to do so.

Please at a redirect from "tard cart" to this entry. Thanks. 24.58.154.67 (talk) 06:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it necessary?[edit]

Bus related article? they sure cover the spread here.24.144.137.244 02:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no. This is an article on slang. Yes, in this artcile Wiki is more like a dictionary than in the average article, and I have no problem with that. But being more like a dictionary entry, people looking this up are interested in slang, and listing equivalents is dictionary-like and may be helpful to someone researching slang. Comparatively, calling Britney Spears a slut would not help anyone researching her. As for being insulting, I may find critics' dislike of Yes's album "Topographical Oceans" to be insulting, but I don't erase that information. If anyone chooses to erase this section again, I would ask you to please further defend your reasons. 156.56.193.5 23:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the following rule page about the usage of slang on Wikipedia: WP:WINAD

Is it appropriate for Wikipedia?[edit]

This entire article deals with a slang term and should be removed.

What is the purpose of this article? It's not an encyclopedic term (as it isn't an official name), and remember, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I think this should be deleted- after all, this isn't Urban Dictionary folks.

But can you define "official"? An encyclopedia's purpose is to be able to define anything that people want to know. If this is a commonly used term (and I know it is, because I ride one) then it belongs here. Anyway, Wikipedia is not censored. But if you think that there is excess POV or something like that, or there are too many derogatory terms, feel free to edit it. Thank you. Ilikefood 23:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, the whole appeal of Wikipedia is that it has information that normal encyclopedias don't have.

"Encyclopedic content must be attributable to a reliable source." This means that not only must the information be eruditic, but it also must relate to "facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation." Listing a variety of insults has nothing to do with study or investigation. If you care to make this truly informational, then research the history of your insults, cite references, and provide information that would generally be useful to real study on the topic. Until you do so, your "contribution" is geared toward nothing but making a segment of the population feel inferior to you.

I'm getting tired of people like you, we are trying to have as many articles as possible so anyone looking for any form of information can find it. Wikipedia has information regarding everything, including slang. If there is any scrap of information that could serve as educating others in any form it should probably be here.

(New comment starts here) I do not see what can be said here, that cannot be said in the articles Minibus or Midibus that is encyclopedic in nature. FURTHERMORE, this article is not linked by the {{Buses}} template, and for good reason. Because of that, I will propose in the VERY NEAR future that this article be deleted, and any relevant information be merged into Minibus or Midibus, or Cutaway van chassis. The bus featured in the article would be referred to as a busette. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 22:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This can be a redirect page. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

I {{prod2}}'d the article after it was improperly listed at AfD. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be more convenient if they merged this?[edit]

I've put up the merge tag on the article now... This article should be merged with the School bus article already here.And this article seems kind of small and seems not to really stand alone as a serious article,I think this should be merged....--Sammy theeditor (talk) 23:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Advertisement for 1975 Wayne Busette.jpg[edit]

The image File:Advertisement for 1975 Wayne Busette.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]