Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cold feet (metaphor)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Cold feet (metaphor)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Wikipedia is not a dictionary; the page is little more than a dictionary explanation of the idiom "to have cold feet" Cyber cobra (talk) 05:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Per subsequent improvements to article, my deletion rationale no longer applies. --Cyber cobra (talk) 19:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

AfDs for this article: 
 * WP:NOTDICT doesn't mean we can't have an article about a word or, in this case, a phrase. The nominator's complaint is about the current state of the article, but in fact, AfD is about whether an encyclopaedic article could be written.   If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing.  This article already mentions this source, which gives us some potentially encyclopaedic material to build on.  An encyclopaedic article ought to give us a history of the phrase, its German (?) origins, examples of early uses, its use in the world wars and the cold war, and then onto scholarly topics such as its use in psychoanalysis and psychology (and here, which is reasonably widely-cited).  Verdict: While I accept that this is a dicdef/stub at the moment, I do think it's potentially fixable.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  06:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is already more than a dictionary definition, though barely, and has lots of room for expansion per S Marshall . Torchiest talk/contribs 16:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIC. I'm not convinced by S Marshall 's arguments that it could be improved without delving into original research.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * S.Marshall gives us concrete evidence of scholarly papers upon the subject and you give us what - a guess, an opinion, a stab in the dark? Where is your evidence, please? Colonel Warden (talk) 13:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete As a textbook case of WP:NOTDICT. There is nothing here that isn't in my Compact OED. Mangoe (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable and may be expanded further. The article does not have a lexical focus and so is not a dictionary definition. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added the origin of the phrase, which is credited to author Stephen Crane in 1896. I agree with Colonel W that the article isn't written as a dictionary definition, but rather as a discussion of the combination of anxiety, indecision and hesitation that is commonly described by this phrase.  Mandsford 14:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:OUTCOMES, WP:BEFORE, WP:HEY, and Mandsford. Many times we have had a crappy stub for a notable concept, which needs to be fixed instead of being nominated for deletion. Every time, someone has to rescue it.  Past example abound -- sisu,  velleity, chaos, nursing in Pakistan, objects visible from space, oligodactyly, even make a mountain out of a molehill.  Some has taken it upon themselves the task of fixing it up to minimum standards. They don't have cold feet; they are bold. Bearian (talk) 23:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A notable expression found everywhere.  D r e a m Focus  13:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as a decent stub with real potential. If there is not much else to say consider a merge but not right away. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep is very common usage in popular culture, and therefore, is worthy of encyclopedic information. Dew Kane (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2010 (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.