Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manut pa
agree this is a dictionary definition, and appears to be based completely on |original research. Not only does the article contain its own OR, but its citations are also pure OR. Of the 3 sources cited, the blog citation is not appropriate, the manager.co.th is an editorial piece, and the Bangkok Post piece consists of more OR and personal commentary by the author in the Lifestyle section &mdash; hardly authoritative sources. As to the coverage identified by Paul_012 above, only one of them might be considered a bona-fide article; all the others are purely personal commentary. Is an obscure "lifestyle" writer's original research worthy of representation in a global encyclopedia?That said, the content of this article ''could'' be kept as part of a larger list article on Thai vocabulary, similar to Singlish vocabulary, which includes similar terms
— User:Amatulic, 16:21, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)