Talk:Sniggle

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 June 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page was nominated for deletion in 2004. Expand to show discussion.

This appears to be a neologism, a made-up word that is not in general usage (and an obscure word for eel fishing which is also not in general usage). A quick Google for the word returns usages, in the "culture jamming / prankster" sense, ONLY pages on sniggle.net and Wikipedia and its clones. I don't think that a word made up by the people that run a web site and not used elsewhere justifies a Wikipedia article, and I vote to delete it, as well as remove the word from all the pages that link to this, since it is not a word understood by the general English-speaking population. It clearly survived VfD once before in November 2003; since it is functionally impossible to look back in the VfD history that far, I have no idea why. It was removed from VfD after four days, suggesting that a complete vote was not taken. —Morven 10:41, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

Delete. The eel meaning appears to be legitimate. Transwiki that to wiktionary. —Rory ☺ 11:41, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
I would say keep, since it only links to culture jamming (we need to check that article to make sure that snigle.com hasn't been added to it inappropriately). However, because "sniggle" is a sort of proprietary slang term, this amounts to advertising stuck on top of a dict def, so delete. Geogre 12:55, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I have removed pretty much all the references to this on Wikipedia. —Morven 02:03, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
- I can't appreciate that: you seem to have started removing without re-linking to culture jamming, e.g. in the September Morn/Harry Reichenbach case. --Francis Schonken 22:05, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Delete - Tεx τ urε 17:12, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
While the present content of the sniggle article is in fact a disambiguation page I vote for: (1) create Sniggle (disambiguation), where the fishing term links to wiktionary and the prankster meaning to culture jamming; (2) make both sniggle and sniggling redirect pages to the sniggle (disambiguation) page. --Francis Schonken 22:05, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- note: at least consider using soft redirect, for the part that goes to wiktionary. --Francis Schonken 22:05, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm trying to get my head around why anyone would consider this article in need for deletion. Complete ignorance on the subject? A hatred of eels? What appalls me about so many decisions the faceless troll-like masses that make up the bulk of Wiki editors make when it comes to what should be included in this encyclopedia is how poorly ill-informed they appear to be, but arrogantly so, and act as if their personal ignorance should be the measuring stick which determines if an article should be deleted. It's only a very lazy person who'd base their editorial decision on a quick google search. Of course sniggling isn't a neologism, it's in almost every English language dictionary (because, you know, eel fishing is a real thing). Do some research before you start claiming this article is of no use to anyone. There are 513 books on eel fishing on Worldcat alone, plus countless articles in angler magazines (obviously these are not big New York Times crossword fans either, Will Shortz uses the term in almost ever other puzzle). For example, I highly recommend "Consider the Eel" by Richard Schweid (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002) which looks at how people around the world cook, eat, harvest, harm, protect and study eels. The irony with this peculiar form of mob-rule editing Wiki has chosen to settle upon is that we spend more energy arguing with the loudest, and usually not the best or well-informed, voices than time spent on actually crafting well-researched encyclopedic entries. I mean, I could work to edit this article, but if it's simply going to get deleted by people who obviously show no interest in the subject why bother? As a sniggler myself all I can say is if the majority decision is to delete this article, so be it, life is short and I'd rather spend my energy and skills helping projects that actually reflect that somebody, somewhere, did a modicum of scholarly research before hand. Himeyuri (talk) 18:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

This article is not going to be deleted because I, for one, am watching over it now. Please feel free to expand the article further. Warden (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic