Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arrestando ipsum qui pecuniam recepit


 * 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 merge to Writ. Liz Read! Talk! 06:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Arrestando ipsum qui pecuniam recepit

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

For over fifteen years, this has been nothing more than a dicdef. Perhaps it could be merged somewhere (I can't think of where, offhand) or moved to Wiktionary, but it is not something that belongs here. BD2412 T 05:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  BD2412  T 05:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Glossary of law. These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Writ. On second thoughts, I think that, in this case, Writ is a better target than the glossary. James500 (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge and redirect to Writ per ; class of identical AfDs. Iseult   Δx parlez moi 07:47, 14 June 2022 (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.