Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folx (term)
per .  The article is certainly longer than a typical dictionary entry, but that does not change the fact that at root, it is still discussing the meaning, usage, and etymology of a word.  It has long been established here that such material belongs on Wiktionary, not Wikipedia.  However, I would not support moving any material there given the dubiousness of the references.  Word Spy is alleged to claim the word has been around for "at least a century".  If that were true it would be found in the OED, but it isn't.  Sounds to me like a case of wishful folk etymology by non-lexicographers.  Very possibly, this is too recent a coining to meet Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion anyway
— User:Spinningspark, 14:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOTDICTIONARY (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)