 | Disambiguation | |||
| ||||
Which template to use?
editThis is NOT an article:
- First line is a definition, and it is already in Wiktionary.
- The next part is in the article Little Tich, which already has a good ref, decent external links and formatting. If Little Tich can be proven to be the origin of 'titch = small boy/small amount', that fact could be added to the Little Tich article. By itself, such a definition seems to me to fail in notability.
- "titch = ballboy" is unverifiable by online dictionaries (given that ballboys are boys, and therefore small, this might be regional slang - but with nothing cited, there is no proof they are called 'titch'). Even if it was verifiable, it would still belong in Wiktionary.
- "titch = small amount" is covered in the Wiktionary entry.
That makes two (possibly three) dictionary definitions, and one section that is a duplicate of a fuller article. One wonders if a Template:Unreferenced should be put up, or if it should go straight to the AfD process. Elanna-Rose 21:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- I decided to be bold and redirect the article to Little Tich. The previous redirect to Ball Boy didn't seem correct according to the research you did. There is a character called "Titch" in Ball Boy (Beano), but the character seemed minor according to the article. -- Gogo Dodo 22:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)