- 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 keep. The consensus of participants is the specialized use as a food product was sufficiently distinct to justify a separate article. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 16:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Pizzle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The concept of "non-human penis" is already covered in the penis article. It's possible we could have two separate articles, one for humans and one for non-humans, but they would properly be at human penis and penis respectively. In either case, we don't need a separate article on this particular word. Powers T 16:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The word refers to the organ's use as a food product, and is well attested. We should keep this just as we have separate articles for Liver and Liver (food).Minnowtaur (talk) 06:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The sense of the word as food isn't even addressed until the third section of the article. How you can say the article is about that sense of the word is puzzling. Powers T 01:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Article can be filled with information from the Russian wikipedia, which is a lot. The main article has long been anthropocentric.Юе Артеміс (talk) 19:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Perfectly reasonable article, comparable with oxtail, chitterlings or tripe. In any case, deletion is quite inappropriate as redirection/merger/split would be the remedy for complete overlap with penis and this would be performed by ordinary editing. Per WP:BEFORE, If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Clearly, I didn't think there was anything worth merging, now did I? Powers T 01:28, 30 June 2010 (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.