Talk:Slang dictionary

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article is supported by the Reference works task force.

Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Improving

For more information on why this articles should be deletd, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary Travelbird 14:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I don't buy that this article can only exist as a dictionary definition. It is a topic that is being researched! See for example, something like this. Albeit, we need more people to look at this article, but if it ultimately ends up as a dictionary entry, I suppose it simply means that the Wiki can't hold this information at this time. --HappyCamper 03:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, it reads as just a dictionary entry - which is why I tagged it as such... It is possible that it could be expanded to a good encylopedia article, but it would then need informaiton such as the history of slang dictionaries, examples of slang dictionaries, perhaps purpose and use of slang dictionaries etc. I won't revert the tag ... even though I feel it was perfectly valid (this time, I'll be 0RR, normally I'm about a 1RR) but I will tag it for expansion ... of course, you can delete that tag as well if you want :-) Brian 04:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)btball[reply]

Hmm...well, I added the {{dict}} back in again. I was hoping that a bunch of Wikipedians would spontaneously jump to find all sorts of neat information for this one. It was quite fun when last time, about 5 Wikipedians did so for one of these articles. Maybe let's leave it as is, and whatever other people like to do with the article, that would be good too. I don't have the motivation right now to dig up the right sources to expand this article in a reasonable way, so for now, the Magic of the Wiki will have to wait (or fall on other Wikipedians). --HappyCamper 04:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes, it does seem like this could be expanded into a cool article. I was just tagging it as what I saw, I hope you don't mind. It would be nice if one or more editors jump in and add enough information so that it's not just a definition / dictionary article. If I get the time I might see what I can turn up ... but I might be being pulled into an informal mediation (on a totally different topic) that could suck up my time - I'll see. Brian 04:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)btball[reply]

No, of course I didn't mind :-) On second reading, this article doesn't offer anything more than what "common sense" would be, and that isn't quite good enough. I think I might revisit this article too. --HappyCamper 04:39, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of last year I expanded this hopefully beyond a simple dictionary definition. There is plenty of room for further expansion and I am unsure the recent Transwiking was strictly called for and it might not make a great wiktionary entry but... (Emperor 10:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I would like to try to add the word dilznakoff to the slang dictionary. How would I go about doing so? Dustyboots696 (talk) 16:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2007-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 07:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]