Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E.g. vs. i.e.

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.81.234.82 (talk) at 06:10, 11 September 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

E.g. vs. i.e.

E.g. vs. i.e. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. There are no sources, and this article seems to constitute unpublished synthesis of material - it doesn't seem like an actual encyclopedic topic. h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 15:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not encyclopedic to compare these two. Have an article on each, by all means, and mention the confusion there if there are sources and it is a problem (was for me, once). Lundse 15:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, i.e. get rid of it. Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. Clarityfiend 17:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cf. List of Latin abbreviations; Q.E.D. --Dhartung | Talk 18:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • DELETE Original research. Agree with Lundse.OfficeGirl 19:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although a lot of people need to read this article, delete. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. shoy 19:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but rewrite. Or merge with List of Latin abbreviations. — Omegatron 01:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The article contains no erroneous information and is a helpful resource clarifying a commonly misunderstood disparity. Who is victimized by it's being here? More good is done by allowing it to exist (which benefits all readers of Wikipedia) than by deleting it (which benefits at most the 3 or 4 tight-ass wikipedia Nazis who removed it, who can somehow look themselves in the mirror and HONESTLY BELIEVE that deleting this article for the sole purpose of "playing by the rules" is actually MORE important than allowing a perfectly valid (and greatly needed) nugget of information to reach millions of confused readers. Anyone who feels that way has no place editing an online information resource to begin with, and should further consider getting a life, a job, and removing the nub of carrot that's plugged up in their sphinky-hole. --Dick Rutherfords
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/E.g._vs._i.e.&oldid=157098324"