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. Sandstein 18:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tweebuffelsmeteenskootmorsdoodgeskietfontein[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's either about a word, (in which case it shouldn't be here), a word construct, (in which case it should be here), or a farm, (in which case it's an unnotable farm, and shouldn't be here). Would've prodded but it, but incredibly it's been here for seven years. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Never heard of this, but there's quite a bit on the net, whether this information originated from Wikipedia or not is a different question. There is also a photo (looks a bit dodgy though), and a song. I think Administrators or very experienced Wikipedians are going to be needed to sort this one out. --Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 12:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is part of South African folklore in much the same way as Llanfairpwllgwyngyll-gogerychwyrndrobwll-llantysilio-gogogoch is part of Welsh folklore. It certainly pre-dates Wikipedia - I for one was aware of the name when I lived in South Africa in the 1960's, but until I read Wikipedia was not sure whether or not it was urban myth. Wikipedia has confirmed that it is not urban myth. I would also draw to attention that it receives at least 10 hits a day - more than many other articles and that alone should signify its notablility. Martinvl (talk) 14:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete I am not familiar with this, but the article as it is currently written seems to be about Tweebuffelsmeteenskootmorsdoodgeskietfontein as a good example of other concepts, as opposed to being a notable place or concept onto itself. Can anyone speak as to whether this particular word is significant, or would any small town with a Afrikaans name serve just as well. As to the traffic, I suspect that it comes mainly from curiosity. The word is used by the articles Wikipedia:Unusual place names,List of long place names,Longest word in Afrikaans, and is tacked on to the end of Compound (linguistics). This is a really tough one, but I feel like it is currently more of a trivia factoid then a fully fleshed out concept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djohns21 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The number of Google hits in no way prove WP:N, but if WP:RS can be met then it is a different story. -Marcusmax(speak) 03:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

move to Wiktionary, delete here The farm exists, near Coligny, North West and under the more common name Twee Buffels. The sources used in the article are less than stellar, though, and the question remains whether a farm should be covered on Wikipedia just because of its long name. WP in Afrikaans claims furthermore (without source) that the name is used as stereotypical Hickville, a tiny, remote, forlorn place. (Sample word use) As such I would believe it has a better place at Wiktionary. --Pgallert (talk) 10:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move It should be moved to the Wiktionary but deleted here because it's more of a definition. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 11:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep when a word of phrase takes a life in its own work & is commented on, it becomes notable. the articles is more than a definition  DGG ( talk ) 03:38, 8 August 2011 (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.