Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antiptosis


 * 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 keep (WP:NAC) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Antiptosis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTDICDEF This seems like just a definition of a word. Benboy00 (talk) 16:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a documented rhetorical device. Although the article in its present form does not go very far beyond a definition and some examples, the article has potential for expansion, possibly noting (with documentation) the rhetorical effects that can be obtained through its use, and summaries any analyses of the device that have been published.  I generally only favor WP:DICTDEF deletions for articles that could not reasonably be expanded beyond the definition.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep If we're speaking to whether this can be expanded beyond a dictionary def, Glossary of rhetorical terms links to a vast range of articles on rhetorical devices that show how articles can be developed with examples, discussion of the rhetorical usage and the effect produced, comparison with other rhetorical devices, who first identified and wrote about it, etc, to add to the comparison of how it works in different languages which is already there - all beyond dictionary definition. Notability is a bit more questionable, since Google Books indicates more 19th century sources than 21st, but at worst it should be merged. --Colapeninsula (talk) 22:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Not a mere dictionary definition, looks like a bit obscure but still notable concept in the field of rhetoric. -- cyclopia speak! 22:11, 23 October 2013 (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.