Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/000s


 * 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 redirect to Triple zero. Consensus is definitely against Keep, but per WP:ATD and WP:CHEAP, I find that power~enwiki's suggestion to redirect is best suitable here. (non-admin closure) Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  02:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

000s

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This, well, it's unclear what it actually is, a disambiguation?, is filled with things which are not called the "000s" in reliable sources. In fact, "000s" seems to be used almost exclusively to mean "thousands", as in "in 000s" in tables or charts. Looking for e.g. "lived in the 800s" yields some results, but looking for the similar "lived in the 000s" gives no results at all. This article seems to be based on some OR extrapolation that if we have 800s or 900s or 1000s, we should have a page for "000s" as well, but I think we shouldn't actually, as it would be a novel invention, not a common expression. Fram (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Fixing links as originally linked at Special:Permalink/864450916 Cabayi (talk) 13:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep It's used with thousands such as 1000s, 2000s and 3000s. – BrandonXLF   (t@lk)  13:36, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Any evidence for this? "Born in the 00s" gives 63 results: "born in the 000s" gives no results at all. I doubt it is used for most of the entries on that page (has anyone really ever used "000s" for "The century from 0-99 almost aligned with the 1st century.", even ignoring that the century starts at 1 and there is no year 0?), so if it is only used for the 2000s (which remains to be seen), it could be a redirect to that at most. Fram (talk) 13:51, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Contrary to 's claim, a search of the wiki shows that 000s is only used as a method for neatly tabulating numbers in multiples of 1000. I'm not seeing a usage in relation to years. This article creates its own ambiguity in need of diambiguation. In its lack of usage elsewhere it verges on WP:A11, something made up. The same argument holds for 000s (century). Cabayi (talk) 13:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Cabayi, That's metioned first on the page. Doesn't the argument hold for 0s and 00s aswell? – BrandonXLF   (t@lk)  13:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * BrandonXLF, "00s" is actually in use to refer to at least the eearly 2000s, as in "music of the 00s". "000s" however is not in use for this. No one says "music of the 000s" or "books of the 000s", but the "00s" versions of these is relatively common. Fram (talk) 14:01, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , if you nominate them I'll consider them & !vote. You've been around the block enough times to know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't work. Cabayi (talk) 14:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * DElete -- This is a particularly useless disambiguation page. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep There are certainly useful things to direct people to at this page, but I'm not sure the present ones are the best. The 000s play an important role in the Dewey System, for instance List_of_Dewey_Decimal_classes. I have found a few instances of people using 000s to refer to thousands over the internet, including some in WP:RS such as to refer to thousands of people. I am dubious, however, about 000s referring to the millennium/century and would like evidence of this from Brandon. JZCL 22:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Triple zero - an existing disambiguation page that covers any of the theoretical suggestions for possible topics here. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 01:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 15:27, 24 October 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:20, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Triple zero is the best solution.  The points on the existing page are pretty far fetched. Add the Dewey system to Triple zero  Legacypac (talk) 10:29, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. This page disambiguates between a number of completely unambiguous things, none of which are called the "000s". No one calls the decade 1000-1009 CE the "000s" (if anyone refers to this decade at all). No one calls the century 1000-1099 CE the "000s" either. I can see how "000s" could mean "milenia", as in the 0000s, the 1000s, the 2000s, ..., but I have never seen this usage; plus we already have the page List of millennia. I'm neutral towards redirecting to Triple zero. It seems like all the usages on that disambiguation are for "000" and not "000s". The usage as "In fact, "000s" seems to be used almost exclusively to mean "thousands", as in "in 000s" in tables or charts." is plausible; however, this is a dictionary definition, and should not have an article. Someone should AfD 00s for similar reasons. BenKuykendall (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - After some internal dithering I think BenKuykendall's reasoning is correct. Almost none of the things currently on it belong and the only remaining bit would appear to be fail DICDEF - and the fact you don't need a DAB for 1 meaning - or even two. I also don't think triple zero, as it stands, covers the 000"s" - it would need a change in title and content to do so, thus a redirect seems unsuited. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:21, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - I would agree with the arguments put forward by BenKuykendall and Nosebagbear. I do not think the page is a useful one and I cannot really see some one searching for 000s when they are looking for any of the articles it lists. Dunarc (talk) 23:39, 6 November 2018 (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.