Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amo, amas, amat


 * 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. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Amo, amas, amat

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't believe this article belongs to Wikipedia; the article says a) that "Amo, amas, amat" are three forms of the Latin verb "to love" (which isn't an encyclopedic topic, and surely Wiktionary already has the word), and b) that the words were a title of a book of Latin phrases (which I don't think has anything special about it). I don't see any potential for expansion in an article either about the words (though there's a fair amount of Google hits) or about the book. (Speedy deletion - probably rightfully - challenged by creator.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 22:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Considerably expandable. Traditional grammatical phrase, and most of the latin most people know. Used for effect in various works; I recall Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (the article is in need of considerable expansion), where this is taught to the hero upon his return to society--with the predictable consequences. Of course we could also have  "amo amas amat in popular culture." but there may not be enough for two articles. DGG (talk) 22:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * We already have Latin conjugation and Latin mnemonics, and Wiktionary already has amo#Latin and Appendix:Latin first conjugation#Active indicative. What do you suggest that we put under this title? Uncle G (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Suggest redirect to Latin conjugation. This is typically one of the first model First Conjugation verbs encountered by Latin students, and is remembered widely.  There are other bits of Latin grammar that might so qualify; I think Jacques Brel wrote a song about the declension of rosa, rosae ("rose") but that probably wouldn't support the article rosa, rosae, rosae, rosam, rosā, either.  - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:02, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to Latin conjugation. If Wikipedia is WP:NOT a dictionary, then it is also not a Latin dictionary or listing of conjugations. If we have an article about the conjugation of this Latin verb, should we then have articles about the conjugation of every verb in every known language? The fact that someone "has heard of it" does not prove notability. Edison (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a source for grammar but the page refers to a Latin phrase (which also happens to be a common grammatical conjugation, but so is "he said, she said" and surely this phrase means more than the basic conjugation) and there are many wiki pages that explain Latin phrases, such as the page for Ad_litem. Also, after searching around there is a wiki page for Latin phrases: List of Latin phrases And on this page there are separate wiki links to phrases that have their own special meaning. Maybe we can keep this page and make a link off the Latin phrases page to it? I also agree the original page can be expanded. Khidhir (talk) 01:01, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not a Latin phrase. It has no meaning.  It is simply the first, second, and third person singular simple present indicative active of "amare", as you can see by reading amo#Latin, which was already linked-to above.  Uncle G (talk) 14:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not a famous epigram; it is just the basic conjugation of a basic verb. It belongs in the Latin wiktionary, not here. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are atleast two books that have this phrase in the title:
 * Amo, Amas, Amat... and All That: How to Become a Latin Lover http://www.amazon.co.uk/Amo-Amas-Amat-All-That/dp/1904977545
 * Amos, Amas, Amat and More: How to. Use Latin to Your Own Advantage http://www.amazon.com/Amo-amas-amat-more-astonishment/dp/0061812498
 * So, I don't think that its usage is just a simple conjugation of the verb. It wouldn't be in the title of the book. For instance, in English, which perhaps is more familiar, it would be common to see a title of a book "He Said, She Said" because this phrase means something beyond the simple conjugation of the verb "to say". However, it would not be common to see a title such as "He Communicated, She Communicated", because there really is nothing more than the conjugation to this phrase (and incidentally these two titles literally mean the same thing, but really convey two different things) The phrase also appears on serveral blogs, a New York Time crossword puzzle (the ultimate arbiter of phraseness!), and the title of a play by Tucki Bailey (haven't read it): http://www.oneglobepublishing.com/yso/music.shtml And I'm not even searching hard :) Khidhir (talk) 08:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're also not reading what your searches find. The book titles are irrelevant.  They don't denote the actual book subjects (which are, in fact, simply the Latin language).  This phrase does not mean anything, in Latin or in English.  It doesn't denote a subject.  It's just the (partial) conjugation of one Latin verb. You are arguing that this is a phrase.  That's an argument suitable for Wiktionary.  Here at Wikipedia we have a Wikipedia is not a dictionary policy, and article titles must denote something.  Neither you nor DGG have provided a single thing for it to denote, other than Latin conjugation, which is what it is, and which at best it should simply redirect to.  And a crossword puzzle is not a source. By the way, this is not a vote. Uncle G (talk) 14:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * So, why have any Latin phrases in Wikipedia? There are hundreds of wiki pages for phrases, such as ad litum, quod erat demonstradum, even et cetera. Would you suggest all these pages be moved to the Wikitionary? Khidhir (talk) 16:30, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Those are all meaningful phrases with a long and encyclopedia-worthy history of usage, not just repetitions of a single word in different verb forms. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with List of Latin phrases (A-B). Latin phrases which enjoy some popularity in English (or other languages for that matter) are of some interest in the field of language study, and some of the most common phrases deserve separate articles. However, I have not seen evidence that this phrase is extremely popular, and the article is little more than a definition. Coverage in the main list seems like a reasonable solution. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - famous epigram, title of famous book. Bearian (talk) 23:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, not an epecially famous phrase, about as useful as an article on do, did, done, an equally non-encyclopedially important example of an irregular verb in English. Wikipedia is not a grammar book. Kusma (talk) 10:28, 9 December 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.