Talk:Goth slang

message: The contesting of the article is valid enough for WP:DRV.  Please post the appeal there before recreating.  Geogre 14:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD vs CSD 

message: As I said in the AfD, I feel it's important that terms on this list are supported by notable reliable sources. I voted Keep on the basis that this article referenced published books, but we need to prevent it from being used to promote neologisms. A few new terms have just been added to the introduction without references (gogan, flinders St goth, post office goth, crow makeup, blow fish). I've requested sources, but I suspect these are non-notable terms (Google reveals hardly anything for most of them). Mdwh 01:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources are a real mess at the moment, I'm going to look through the history and try sort it out. - Deathrocker 07:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable and reliable sources 

message: It seems that there's a disagreement over the importance of this article. As a 3rd party to the issue (I'm just passing through), allow me to suggest another idea: merge this article to Gothic subculture...
Whatever you do, however, for the sake of continuity it definitely needs to be the same course of action that is taken with other (subculture) slang articles. 66.229.160.94 08:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although Goth subculture gets the message "This page is 32 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable", so we should really be moving stuff to separate articles if possible rather than merging back in in my opinion, and this seems a good candidate for a separate article. What advantages are there to a merge? Mdwh 10:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Compromise

message: "doom cookie" according to the most popular definiton on UrbanDictionary.com as well as definition on Encyclopedia Gothica refers to the fact that the person lacks understanding of the goth subculture but is attempting to give others the impression that he or she does, and is thus seen as "other-than-genuine". Urban dictionary also uses gender neutral language.
In my opinion the current definition "A derogatory term directed particularly at young goth women." is misleading in that it leaves the general reader with the impression that young women are generally denigrated amongst goths. It also erradicates the sense of "other-than-genuine" carried in these 2 sources. A "goth female" in plain language means an "authentic goth female".  
In order to better align the definition with the secondary sources I would like to change the text for the definition to:
"doom cookie : A derogatory term for a person (particularily a young female) who is seen as other-than-genuine in the goth scene."
Does anyone object?
TheDarknessVisible 03:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we mention women at all, if that's the problem, and there's no evidence that this is used for women in particular? Mdwh 04:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Encyclopedia Gothica includes the reference to "doom cookie" usually being used particularily for "young gothy females", lacking a more authoritative source we haven't got much choice. Does it make sense for wiki to cite urbandictionary.com at all, considering that it is not an academic source?  An improved definition that at least indicates the context of the denigration would be more accurate and useful to the general reader than simply stating  it's a denigration.  I chose the words "in the goth scene" as this avoids using the slang "gothy" in the definition and is therefore more accessible to general readers than "gothy". "young goth women" is also simply wrong as "young gothy females" (from EG) does not mean "young goth women". "gothy" and "goth" do not mean the same thing.  The original "young females" is superior language for an encyclopedia so there is no reason to change "young females" to "young women". So after all that I still propose "doom cookie : A derogatory term for a person (particularily a young female) who is seen as other-than-genuine in the goth scene." as a significant improvement.  But if it were based on my personal research I would drop the gender requirement.  However I do not feel strongly about that issue as I am willing to accept Encyclopedia Gothica as more authoritative than my personal anecdotes which can't be reliable outside of my local goth scene.
TheDarknessVisible 09:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I've heard "Whitby" used by anyone who's heard of WGW, not just people who attend. It's not like there's much else going on in Whitby that far-flung goths would regularly discuss. 4.131.37.148 08:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: This is the stupidest article yet, and I doubt you will draw the "kind" of people who could actually testify these words because they probably would not care about it. If the point of a counter culture is to "counter" conformation and express oneself in an alternative way, then what would be the point of setting "archtypes" to once again "close" ones entire self into a "subtype" of person. Therefore, no one who is probably a participate of the subculture would care or endorse any of this. What is a "perky goth". My spouse is normally happy and outgoing, she is not "feigning" anything and she listens to traditional goth rock. You make it sound as if happiness/sadness is an issue and that one is "supposed" to be "sad". These look more like slang for people outside of the subculture and looking at it (and of course misunderstanding it entirely). They just reinforce false and unfounded stereotypes. All of these are horrible sources, linking to sites with google ads all over. Furthermore, it is horribly written. Why is "worship trent.." worded as if they literally "worship" a frontman for a band? This looks like one of those emails people pass around. Now my argument is not whether slang is meant to be helpful or stereotypical or harmful or what. It is that this page is VERY poorly sourced, very poorly written, and unfounded as to its right to even exist. This very page I find very unbecoming of the gothic subculture itself. Now, some like spooky kid and mansonite are slang but only because you would think anyone would find a noun to identify an object of contempt. Apart from that, alot of these "subtypes" are not verifiable. And why would anyone care about nine inch nail fans, that is the metal scene which has nothing to do with the goth scene? I know I do not care at all for what anyone else likes, they can do as they wish.
:I retract my statement. Some articles link to this article (more than I thought) and if it were to disappear you would have to replace it or find another solution. I just oppose about half the words and their sources, but meh.
::I agree about the "perky goth" statement you made.  The idea that all Goths are unhappy, depressed beings 24/7 IS ridiculous.  There are plenty of sources to discredit such a stereotype.  Darkwriter 18:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't actually met any really depressed Goths. Some may be a little messed up in the head, but not depressed. Most I know that act really depressed do so just for humour value. Zazaban 22:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: wtf

message: I thought that Spooky Kids were those who are into 'darker' things but prefured a lighter or maybe even commical way, sort of similar to The Adams Family or The Munsters.In other words as i've heard to put 'happy goths'. Am I wrong on this? 65.2.145.189 19:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spooky Kids 

message: I am moderately surprised that this page survived AfD actually, as it appears to contravene WP:NOT. However, as consensus (well amnogst the tiny number of people who voted) was to keep, then it needs a sensible clean-up. Specifically, anything here which does not have a reliable source needs deleting as per WP:V. If this doesn't happen the whole article will turn into a list of neologisms and non-notable terms. I'm going to start in on this... if I delete anything that people feel should remain, then please provide your source and we can put it back in. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, nothing has really been done to improve this page. A note on sources: you can't use waningmoon, slangsite, urbandictionary or any other self-published source (see WP:SPS). Also, check WP:NEO and WP:NOT. If it's not reliably sourced, it can be deleted as vandalism. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, but you still need a reliable source and demonstrate it's not a neologism. The fact that the term is used is actually not enough; that might fall under 'stuff that me and my mates made up one day'. Of course, that'll always be a problem with a slang article, but for notability to established you need a source to show it's widespread. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This page needs a lot of work

message: Faggoth. Add?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.227.217 (talk • contribs) 
:What's your reliable source for it? Mdwh (talk) 11:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faggoth. 

message: This article is pointless - no other subculture article has its own slang article, and none of them should have. The terms described in this article are subject to colloquialisms and the meanings of the words may differ completely between groups of people. It is in no way notable or encyclopaedic and should be deleted and blocked from being re-created. If anywhere, the terms described here belong in other articles about goth subculture but do not deserve their own article.
86.14.89.251 (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This ought to be deleted, as many comments on this page suggest. Aryder779 (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous AfD suggested otherwise - but feel free to repropose it for deletion. Mdwh (talk) 00:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

text: See the top of this talk page for a list of articles for slang terms. And whilst I'm not normally a fan of these sorts of articles, the terms listed here meet the notability requirements of having a 3rd party reference. Mdwh (talk) 00:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

text: More accurately, one other subculture has its own slang article. The others mentioned in the list are either dead links, concern hoaxes (Grunge) or are regional or professional rather than subcultural. The article is rather pointless: all the terms are either self explanatory, referenced elsewhere, or both. The list is also rather short. If goths had a secret language like Polari, it would be worthy of an article, but a list of eleven, often rather obvious, terms fails notability, not having received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject; almost all references are to publications written by and for goths and how significant is the coverage of slang specifically, even within those? See also Wikipedia is not a dictionary which specifically says, "Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a slang, jargon or usage guide." (my italics) Paul S (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This, this, a thousand times this! Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. This should be deleted on the grounds that it is unnoteworthy. No Goth I have ever known has ever used any of this slang, save for the derogatory "Mansonite" or "metal-tard". Seems a waste of space to me. Cheers! Very Old School Goth (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Yes. Delete it. We never used these terms (except Rivethead for electro-industrial heads and Spooky Kids for Manson fans). --Chontamenti (talk) 15:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It has references, but that's not the point; nobody is arguing for deletion on the basis that people aren't really referred to as Babybats or Rivetheads or whatever. It should be deleted on the basis that Wikipedia is not a dictionary and the article amounts to a short, pointless list of fairly self-explanatory terms. Paul S (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I won't lose any sleep if it stays. I've heard all kinds of fun "Goth club slang" over the years that probably wouldn't make it into the page as it would likely be considered original research. Some of my favourites have been "Space Yetis" to describe obese EBM fans, "DayGlo Psychlos" for the crowd that wears yarn hair, goggles and Transmuters and "Denim Walri" for the obese women who wear jeans with a corset that they somehow manage to bend the steel boning in with their rolls. The not-so creative phrase "Spanker Wankers" describes the creepy S&M crowd that haunts most of the local clubs here. Then there's "fang-tards" which describe the crowd that shows up to Goth clubs just to LARP. We also always used "metal-tards" in reference to the kids who showed up in metal t-shirts and didn't understand why nobody would give them the time of day. I could go on, but I'll stop here. Fun to recount to friends over a pint, but not something I'd devote a page to on wikipedia, personally. Cheers! Very Old School Goth (talk) 00:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete