Talk:Big Red

RFD discussion: January 2022

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

Big Red

Tagged as speedy here by User:WordyAndNerdy with the reason "No lexical value. This woman is not a public figure (no Wikipedia article, no social media presence). The only articles about her in the last 5 years are about how she was stalked and harassed while grocery shopping.". — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete, doesn't look like dictionary material to me atleast. —Svārtava ^{[t•c•u•r]} 16:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I think this is more an RFV issue. If the only attestations refer to one specific individual, it should perhaps be deleted (we don't have orange man either, though I'm not so sure as to why we don't these; they convey non-transparent meaning, no?). If, on the other hand, it can be attested to mean any particular of a broader class of people (as is the case with a similar term AIDS Skrillex in this citation), it should obviously be kept. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete, Jberkel 16:33, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Refers to a non-notable person. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 17:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Sometimes you get it right, unlike with subway car. DonnanZ (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Donnanz: Why do you bring this up here? — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

To highlight the difference between good judgment and poor judgment. DonnanZ (talk) 18:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't think you have any valuable insight to share into what is or isn't good judgement, considering you vote based on whether institutions are important to people. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 18:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

So? My abstention from voting for your adminship was also a recent decision. DonnanZ (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete. I speedied this for a reason. An article about this meme wouldn't last a minute on Wikipedia on notability and BLP grounds. The subject has spent the last 10 years keeping a low profile. She's been stalked and harassed in person because of this meme. We're a dictionary, not a place to memorialize every bit of 4chan effluvium. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 18:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is completely irrelevant here. We have our own inclusion policies, see WT:CFI. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 18:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

CFI is full of major gaps. There's nothing in it that explicitly provides for the inclusion of nicknames or epithets for specific individuals. That seems to be another one of those unwritten policies we've never gotten around to making into actual policy. Beyond that, there's nothing in CFI establishing notability guidelines for what individuals warrant entries for their nicknames/epithets (politicians and pop stars seem safe), nor any kind of BLP-like instrument for navigating the complex factual, ethical, and legal considerations involved in writing about living persons. In the absence of an existing policy framework on our side, it's entirely reasonable to look to Wikipedia for guidance. In any case, this is all rather perpendicular to the main topic at hand. This entry needs to be nuked with an orbital laser. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiktionary is still bound by a relevant Wikimedia Foundation resolution at least, which emphasizes "Taking human dignity and respect for personal privacy into account when adding or removing information, especially in articles of ephemeral or marginal interest", which could apply here. That said, the nickname is already widely known. 70.172.194.25 21:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete Vininn126 (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete. A person. Not dictionary material. Equinox ◑ 22:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

RFD-snowball deleted. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)