Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diligence


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 21:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Diligence

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:NOTDICT C T J F 8 3  21:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Nom says it all. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 22:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect to Wiktionary. This is a very plausible search term, and we can do better for our end-users than a redlink.  I also don't think it's wise to turn this title into redlink that encourages a new user to create an article in that space.— S Marshall  T/C 23:41, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not an article about a word and so WP:DICDEF is not relevant. Our editing policy is to diligently improve notable topics rather than to delete them. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You seem to be misunderstanding the point of WP:DICDEF. That policy does not claim to be only relevant to articles about words, and in fact many articles about words easily meet notability criteria (for instance, nigger, thou, and others). It's not saying that there shouldn't be articles about words; it's just saying that articles should not simply be definitions, which this article is. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The nutshell for WP:DICDEF is "In Wikipedia, things are grouped into articles based on what they are, not what they are called by. In a dictionary, things are grouped by what they are called by, not what they are.".  The point is whether we are discussing a particular word - its etymology, grammar, usage - or are we discussing a topic - facts about a particular thing or concept.    The test is not whether we have a definition because WP:DICDEF explains that "both dictionaries and encyclopedias contain definitions".  The tests are laid out in DICDEF.  Consideration of synonyms is one of them.  Relevant synonyms are words such as application &mdash; I once won a school prize for "application".  Do we have a separate article for application?  We find that that's just a dab page and does not yet include that meaning of "the action or habit of applying oneself closely (to a task, etc.); assiduous effort, attention, diligence.".  When we look at the word assiduous we find that it's a redirect to diligence.  When we look at industry (disambiguation), we find that it starts "Generally industry is diligence, assiduity, hard work".  So it seems that we have no other main article about the virtue of diligence/application/assiduity/industry/hard work.  In choosing a title for this general topic, diligence seems a reasonable common name for the concept and we can then use redirects such as assiduous to manage the synonyms.  I shall now demonstrate by applying myself diligently. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Make into disambig by moving the contents of Diligence (disambiguation) into here, and then making that one a redirect to this one. That ought to satisfy those who suggest a soft redirect to Wiktionary because it already contains one. Reyk YO!  06:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Translate it from the German Wikipedia The German Wikipedia has an acceptable amount of information about this virtue. My German is perfect, but unfortunately my translation skills are very bad.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Col. Warden, and based on WP:OUTCOMES - see Articles for deletion/Sisu, Articles for deletion/Velleity, and Articles for deletion/Chaos. Core concepts are kept, rather than deleted or sent to WikiSiberia. Bearian (talk) 21:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC) P.S. See also Articles for deletion/Sisu (2nd nomination). Bearian (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2011 (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.