Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counterword


 * 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 of the debate was delete. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 19:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Counterword
This article is a dictdef and already has an entry on Wiktionary. (counterword) James084 05:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Imban 05:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete as redundant. Roy  boy cr ash  fan  [[Image:Flag_of_Texas.svg|30px]] 06:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. --Ter e nce Ong 06:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. &mdash;-- That Guy, From That Show!  (talk) 2006-03-04 07:53Z 
 * Delete unless someone can write a good article on how and why counterwords are notable (e.g. past vs. recent usage in academia and the media, etc.). --CrypticBacon 08:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Move the examples and Bartleby's link to counterword and delete. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Deckiller 05:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOR and WP:WINAD. Stifle 17:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable and not original research. Wilful ignorance is shameful in an encyclopedia. Kappa 10:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --OneEuropeanHeart 04:12, 8 March 2006 (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.