Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/҉


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was No consensus (default keep). Also renamed article as Combining Cyrillic Millions.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 23:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

҉
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about a unicode character. Taking away the "supposed" backwards text effect (which I know of, but it isn't, and is unlikely to be, cited), there's nothing that distinguishes it from any other unicode character Will (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete unless reliable sources are found. Can't really imagine, say, the New York Times covering this. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It would be a shame if a reliable source can't be found, then, as because of this AfD, I learned something both interesting and useful, and that precisely is the purpose of an encyclopedia. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:USEFUL. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 15:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm perfectly aware of WP:USEFUL -- that's why I didn't !vote to keep on that basis, but only commented. —Quasirandom (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Should the article be kept, and it probably shouldn't, it needs to be moved to a different title. This is a combining character, and is never meant to stand on its own. --Ptcamn (talk) 14:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This symbol is of genuine notability as it is part of the unicode set and has unique - if strange - functionality. That the article doesn't have good referencing is not a reason to delete it but rather to improve it. I have had occasion to wonder what on earth that symbol is and WP is the best location to find the answer. Witty Lama 15:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, please read WP:USEFUL. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 15:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Besides, the article pretty well explains that it *doesn't* have that "unique strange functionaliy" you think it does. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (sprihc rettO•sllehsmalc nekorB) • sretto sih dna remmaH dnuoP neT  .secruos elbailer yna ni egarevoc oN eteleD...er, make that Delete No coverage in any reliable sources.  Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 15:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If cool were a category for inclusion, this would fly. Alas it isn't, so Delete TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 17:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's a character, and not even a letter.  It has no effect on the world.  Utgard Loki (talk) 17:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Unicode characters no evidence that the subject is notable through significant coverage by reliable, independent sources. Guest9999 (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's not just a unicode character; people seem to be missing the point that it's part of the Cyrillic alphabet. --Dhartung | Talk 21:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, if reliable sources are not found, then it should be redirected to the Cryllic numerals page (or is it a character of the Cryllic alphabet?).--Porsche997SBS (talk) 22:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment does this character have an actual "name" I can't even get to this article in firefox and regardless of the outcome of this AfD it would probably be a good idea to make a redirect to this article with an english (or other latin alphabet-based) name.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 20:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, you should keep this, because I registered here so you don't delete it. Long live ‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭҉! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Episdn (talk • contribs) 23:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.