Deletion of Aye aye, sir

Comment: Wiktionary has https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aye_aye,_sir this entry and that is the appropriate wiki project for definitions of words, idioms and phrases. Per , Wikipedia is not a dictionary. In some cases a word or phrase can be the subject of an article, but it must meet . The word or phrase must be the subject of verifiable coverage by reliable sources. I cannot find any such sources, and the page is distinctly lacking any. There is an interesting but unsourced description of how the navy term may have arisen, but without a source it is impossible to say whether this is folk etymology or real, and without reliable sourcing, it should not be there. Examples of usage would properly belong in Wiktionary, not here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC||WP:WORDISSUBJECT)

Comment: to Yes and no#Aye and variants per nom and Clarityfiend.  This is a poorly sourced article that is half  and half .  It is already covered in the proposed redirect target, as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICDEF||WP:OR)

Comment: per Clarityfiend. This is at most a dictionary definition, and a long-standing piece of |original research. I agree with Eric that this article is an embarrassment as it stands, and there is no meaningful chance that this can be turned into an actual encyclopedia article
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: the opportunities for expansion beyond dictionary are endless. Military, popular culture, cartoons, etc. These things 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEXIST)