- 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 Delete. Cbrown1023 00:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a word definition, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Furthermore, the article is in the English namespace, but the word is Korean, and is not English slang, and is nearly never heard in accordance with the English language. Kevin (TALK) 18:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:NOT wiktionary. However, Furthermore, the article is in the English namespace, but the word is Korean, and is not English slang, and is nearly never heard in accordance with the English language. is not a valid reason for deletion. If a Korean word were encyclopedically notable by virtue of having multiple sources written about it in Korean, etc., and an entry could be written about it that was not a dicdef, it would deserve a place in enwiki, regardless of the fact that no one had ever used the word or written about it in English. We have a whole Category:Korean terms. This is an encyclopedia IN English, not an encylopedia OF English. cab 02:34, 31 December 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.