Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British words not widely used in the United States (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:38, 13 May 2008

List of British words not widely used in the United States

Previously AfDed for four times. But this article is complete original research. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - Massive OR. asenine ^{say what?} 07:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Original Research is just the beginning. It is also non-verifiable and "factually" incorrect as a number of the words are used widely by Americans both inside and exterior to the United States. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It needs tidying up, and is prey to the addition of lots of WP:OR, but the core of it is good dictionary-based material. I see nothing here to change the consensus to keep in previous AfD discussions. SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The last AfD was in January of this year. The sentiment at that time was literally unanimous for keeping (excepting the nom of course). Given that I think it's a tad early for a new AfD. Like keep voters in the previous AfD's, the only thing I can say of this list is that it seems quite encyclopedic to me. I'd never heard of it before but it also seems quite useful on the face. Neither of these are standard AfD arguments but I do think they are somewhat valid as this is neither a typical article nor list (it does pass WP:N, for whatever that's worth). I don't believe the list is inherently OR or inherently unsourceable (indeed the whole thing could probably be sourced to a dictionary of some sort). It would be nice if most or all of these entries were sourced, but that's not a reason to delete. It seems that the article is fairly well maintained and relatively accurate (based on a cursory review). After four previous AfD's and a unanimous "keep" vote early this year it seems too soon to be discussing this again. Obviously if consensus has changed I'll be proven wrong.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Encyclopedic coverage of British and American English includes comparing them, like this article does (as well as other articles in Category:American and British English differences. Excessive original research in the article warrants cleanup, not deletion. — Ksero (talk | contribs) 08:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 *'''Keep'''. It needs tidying up, and is prey to the addition of lots of [[WP:OR]], but the core of it is good dictionary-based material. I see nothing here to change the consensus to keep in previous AfD discussions.  <small><b>[[User:Snalwibma|<font color="darkblue">SNALWIBMA</font>]]</b> ( [[User talk:Snalwibma|<font color="2F4F4F"><b>talk</b></font>]] - [[Special:Contributions/Snalwibma|<font color="2F4F4F"><b>contribs</b></font>]] )</small> 08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 *'''Keep'''. The last AfD was in January of this year. The sentiment at that time was literally unanimous for keeping (excepting the nom of course). Given that I think it's a tad early for a new AfD. Like keep voters in the previous AfD's, the only thing I can say of this list is that it seems quite encyclopedic to me. I'd never heard of it before but it also seems quite useful on the face. Neither of these are standard AfD arguments but I do think they are somewhat valid as this is neither a typical article nor list (it does pass [[WP:N]], for whatever that's worth). I don't believe the list is inherently OR or inherently unsourceable (indeed the whole thing could probably be sourced to a dictionary of some sort). It would be nice if most or all of these entries were sourced, but that's not a reason to delete. It seems that the article is fairly well maintained and relatively accurate (based on a cursory review). After four previous AfD's and a unanimous "keep" vote early this year it seems too soon to be discussing this again. Obviously if consensus has changed I'll be proven wrong.--[[User:Bigtimepeace|Bigtimepeace]] <small>| [[User_talk:Bigtimepeace|talk]] |  [[Special:Contributions/Bigtimepeace|contribs]]</small> 08:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
+*'''Keep'''. Encyclopedic coverage of British and American English includes comparing them, like this article does (as well as other articles in [[:Category:American and British English differences]]. Excessive original research in the article warrants cleanup, not deletion. — [[User:Ksero|Ksero]] ([[User talk:Ksero|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ksero|contribs]]) 08:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)