Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Generation Z slang

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. A rename or rescope are editorial decisions that don't require a relist. Star Mississippi 18:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Generation Z slang

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This seems like the most direct violation of WP:DICTIONARY possible; an indiscriminate collection of words used by (predominantly American) teenagers, with little prose and often sourced exclusively to barebones Dictionary.com entries.

There are no lists of slang used by other generations on WP, and nearly all of the terms included here were/are used for a vanishingly short period of time before disappearing into obscurity. Such is the nature of language, particularly among young people, but that doesn't mean we need to be documenting every weeks-long language trend among a relatively small demographic group. AviationFreak💬 15:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. AviationFreak💬 15:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Bougie, brainrot and AF are terms I've heard used and use, I'm nowhere near GenZ. This suggests notability... Seem well-sourced, not a slam dunk, but it's ok. Oaktree b (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are plenty of words that I've heard, including many outside of the "Standard English" dictionary, that don't have an entry anywhere on Wikipedia (nor do I think they should). Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, should not be in the business of cataloging words outside of legitimate glossaries that aid in a reader understanding articles on a particular topic. AviationFreak💬 17:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Zoomer slang has received particular coverage from prominent/WP:RS sources - Insider ([1] [2]), LA Times ([3] [4], WaPo ([5] [6]), NYP ([7]), Politico ([8]), USA Today ([9]), Newsweek ([10]) - with the related topic of Gen Alpha slang receiving coverage from the NYT ([11]). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightoftheswords281 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Granted, the article has some WP:OR issues and could use some work, but this topic (Gen Z slangs) has received a lot of coverage from reliable sources. (The article's also receiving ~5860 page views daily [12].) Some1 (talk) 02:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to having an article just on "Generation Z Slang", but this list format is not what that article should look like. A well-sourced prose article (using some of the quality sources in the current article) would be fine, but the article at present is exactly the kind of thing that WP:NOTDICTIONARY is aimed against. Reliable sources absolutely do cover this topic, and the topic as a whole is notable, but a poorly-sourced exhaustive list with little actual explanatory prose should not be the way we cover the topic. AviationFreak💬 02:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So be bold and fix it, including moving the article to Generation Z slang if necessary. But requesting the deletion of the entire article because you disagree with the format and structure, even though you agree that Reliable sources absolutely do cover this topic, and the topic as a whole is notable, is not the way to go. Some1 (talk) 03:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think editing a page at that scale (i.e., an entire rewrite and page move) is beyond what WP:BOLD is getting at. I do not believe a "List of Generation Z Slang" as an article has a place on Wikipedia, so I've requested its deletion. A prose article on the overall topic of Generation Z slang seems reasonable, but I believe that's an entirely separate article. Surely a better alternative to a BOLD edit of that scale would be a discussion like the one we're having now, given the possibility of the WP:BRD cycle undoing a time-consuming page rewrite. AviationFreak💬 03:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to note that List of ethnic slurs has a list format similar to List of Generation Z slang. Some1 (talk) 23:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note also the clearly-defined inclusion criteria on the talk page, quality sourcing, and lack of OR. Additionally, that article has long been a part of Wikipedia, and when it went through a number of deletion discussions, the main focus was on the offensiveness of the content, not its format or status in functioning as a dictionary. Other stuff exists. AviationFreak💬 00:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per others and maybe Move to List of 21st century youth slang or something similar. - Sebbog13 (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the subject's notability. Could also Compromise, if y'all want, by removing the non linked words and keeping the notable ones to have a more specific inclusion criteria. TheWikiToby (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The inclusion criteria can be discussed on the article's talk page. This AfD isn't the place for that. Some1 (talk) 22:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the topic does take at least some precedence since Aviation did say that the problem was that the list mostly includes "indiscriminate" words sourced to "barebones Dictionary.com entries." The newly proposed inclusion criteria would fix this concern. Aviation even noted the list of ethnic slurs' clear inclusion criteria when you brought it up. TheWikiToby (talk) 22:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can propose your idea on the article's talk page Talk:List of Generation Z slang. Some1 (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. TheWikiToby (talk) 23:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, however very heavily rework in order to make the page more formal and encyclopedic. A clear case of the unprofessional manner of the page are the examples. The example for "brainrot" is "Bro, the skibidi toilet gyatt ohio sigma kai cenat rizzler memes are literal brainrot..." which is not very professional nor encyclopedic. Jon.yb093 (talk) 10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not sure that all of the slang has fallen into obscurity, but the inclusion criteria concerns me. Some slang, like "fanum tax," is mostly used by Gen Alpha. "Aura" was popularized in 2024; is that even Gen Z? A portion of the content has wording comparable to what one would find from Urban Dictionary. Semi-protection has helped, but "skibidi ohio sigma gyatt fanumtax rizzler"-esque brainrot persists on the page. Rusty 🐈 21:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) (ping me!) 17:52, 21 July 2024 (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.