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 no consensus. Even some of the users arguing for deletion are admitting that the topic is encyclopedic but the article currently is not. As such, the shortcomings of the list itself, which can be fixed through editing as the keep !votes point out, cannot be a reason for deletion in itself. None of the keep !votes address what the inclusion criteria for such a list should be or whether such criteria are even possible to be thought of. As such, the discussion has not resulted in a consensus on what to do with this article. Further discussion on relevant talk pages is probably needed. Regards SoWhy 11:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is an interesting idea, but has insurmountable problems. First, there are thousands of such words; second, there are 20 countries in Spanish America (and 25 Hispanophone countries in all) with many local variations between them. To give an idea of the scale of the problem, the Spanish - English section of Collins' Spanish dictionary has 602 pages. Opening it at random, on one page (p.478) I count 14 words where distinct Spanish-American meanings are given, some complex - e.g. the noun regalía means privilege, prerogative, perquisite, bonus, but also:
(c) (Ant, CAm, Col) gift, present
(d) (Arg, Cu, Mex) royalty; advance payment
(e) (Ven) excellence, goodness, beauty
There is no possibility that a list like this, short of the size of a dictionary, can ever be anything but a misleading over-simplification. JohnCD (talk) 21:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per JohnCD, there are just way too many of these, and there isn't really a set inclusion criteria. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(a) WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, (b) for the reasons given, the Spanish situation is much more complex, (c) when it comes to language-related articles a systemic bias towards English is reasonable and to be expected in the English-language Wikipedia. JohnCD (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Regretfully, because I think that this would be a good topic if it were given scholarly treatment, but there's no way that I could vote to keep this article. Not only is it unsourced, but the premise of it is pretty much that a word that has one meaning in Spain will have a slang (or more to the point, disgusting) meaning in Argentina. Case in point is the verb "coger", which is said to mean "to take" in Spain, but "to fuck" in Argentina. I suppose I could make the same assumption about the British English verb "do", which as we all know is a dirty word in the United States, right? I mean, if you say that someone is "doing" someone else, we know what that means. Never mind that "to do" generally means the same thing in the U.K. and the U.S., the first description is funnier. It's not a matter of systemic bias; the British-American English article does not take this type of "it's a dirty word over here" approach. Mandsford (talk) 12:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 15:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or start over. This is certainly a notable topic and as such one that is worth covering on Wikipedia but this fails both WP:V and any reasonable level of required quality of article content. I'm aware that the latter is not usually a valid deletion rationale but in this case it should be taken into account if the article is not significantly improved. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mandsford. Sure, there is a topic in here, but I don't think it will be found under this title. Drmies (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sure there are thousands, just like in English, and there are regional differences within South America, just as there are in the US or the UK. Stick to entries which are well referenced. like coger [1]. Just as important with respect to the Spanish language as with respect to the English language. A portion of this is covered in Spanish profanity, but there are non obscene differences, like a "tortilla" being a small cake in Spain, or a Mexican corn flatbread well known in the U.S.[2]. Edison (talk) 19:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I find that there would be some Anglophones who would find this particularly notable. I'd be interested to see if there was an equivalent page on the Spanish wiki... Rennell435 (talk) 11:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The closest to an equivalent page on the Spanish language wiki is this: [3]. --Jotamar (talk) 11:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The page you provided is good. I think the English article needs expanding, and if someone who works on both EnWiki and EsWiki were to transcribe it over from the Spanish one, then it might be worthwile saving. However, I think if an Anglophone is really interested in regional Spanish vocab differences, Wikipedia wouldn't really be the first port of call, and definitely not the wisest source to use. It belongs in a dictionary or a book devoted to the subject, and I think that's where most people would look anyway.
Keep Of the thousands of books devoted to Spanish usage (See worldCat and [4] for lists), many are devoted to particular countries or topics, but most make comparisons. Some are devoted primarily to doing that. (The only one I personally know is Cassell's beyond the dictionary in Spanish; a handbook of everyday usage, which I recommend as entertaining as well as informative--it explains key differences country by country. ) DGG ( talk ) 03:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand-- I don't like the article, but its a start. It's a notable topic and sources are available. --Jmundo (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to wiktionary, and rebuild as a appendix there. 76.66.194.183 (talk) 12:58, 18 October 2009 (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.
