The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre
Can anyone justify including this info? Please see WP:NOT, especially that it's not "A complete exposition of all possible details," not a "Textbooks and annotated texts," and not "an indiscriminate collection of information." Compare a far more famous example, Nadsat, from A Clockwork Orange, neither of which contain a large vocabulary list like this. This article doesn't assert any particular source for these words, nor any critical scholarship commenting on why the use of unusual terms is special. I think this whole section should be deleted, but I'll wait and see if anyone has any reasons supporting its inclusion. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:53, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
