Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ned (Scottish)

Ned (Scottish)

Was marginal consensus to redirect to Chav the last time, but editors don't want to respect that and insist on keeping the article. It is an identical term to Chav, merely scottish, and it seems that some Scottish patriots are insisting on a separate article even though it is identical in meaning to chav, SqueakBox 17:02, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Contrary to the assertions of Squeakbox, 9/7 is by no means a consensus. The previous AfD was closed as a keep by another admin and this decision was changed by Squeakbox two months after the initial closing of the AfD. Although the two terms bear some superficial resemblance, they are by no means the same. The use of "ned" pre-dates "chav" by at least forty years. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:10, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If the issue is to decide between keep and merge the article shouldn't be discussed here. Speedy keep this, Pilatus 17:10, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

File:ENG.PNG

NO

File:Uk flag large.png

Scotland+England+Wales+NI= UK

(erm, what about Wales and N. Ireland then? Just arrogance ignoring them really, isn't it?)

Wales and NI don't have their own versions of Chav, SqueakBox 17:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is not true. This is the place to discuss it if it needs to be redirected, SqueakBox 17:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion policy is here: WP:DP. You want to put merge tags on Chav and Ned (Scottish) and discuss the move on the article talk page. Pilatus 17:18, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable term that is used in Scotland as an equivalent to the English Chav and Irish Scallywag. Piecraft 17:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. You have reverted in defiancce of a Vfd and now you are claiming we cannot put another vfd on it, SqueakBox 17:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was me that reverted the redirect, not Pilatus (who I assume the comment was directed to). Personally, I have no problem with you taking the issue back to AfD. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And I have no problem not making it a redirect but just merging relevant material and deleting. I am not arguing that scally should get the same treatment because Ireland is a separate country. We have already deleted Charver and Charva on the basis that they are other words for Chav, and it should be the same for Ned, SqueakBox 17:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC) SqueakBox 17:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It may interest you to know that England and Scotland are also separate countries; They just happen to be part of the same state. Charver and chavra are obviously derivatives of chav and do not deserve separate entries. The same cannot be said of ned, which is of completely different origin. --GraemeL ^(talk) 18:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am English but I respect the indisputable fact that Scotland is a nation with its own culture. By the way there is no such thing as a "marginal consensus" only a marginal vote, which is not a consensus at all. CalJW 18:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Why does everything that is distictively Scottish have to be homogeneised and fitted in to an English perspective of the planet? Variety is the spice of life. For another example of this linguistic levellerism, see Talk:Public school (UK).--Mais oui! 19:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

KeepThis is distinct to Scottish culture, irrespective of similar expressions that may or may not exist in other Britannic cultures.--Nicodemus75 22:44, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]