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
