Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glossary of alternative medicine (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Shii (tock) 06:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Glossary of alternative medicine
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Per WP:NOT, this isn't really appropriate here: it consists solely of short dictionary definitions for terms. It has been transwiki'd to Wiktionary, so the content won't be lost, and could even be linked using wikt: as a prefix, once the Wiktionary team finish it up. 86.** IP (talk) 20:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, or alternatively rename to list of alternative medicine topics. Neutralitytalk 22:52, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. There are quite a few "Glossary of..." articles.  The reason is to provide a place where technical terms from a particular area are succinctly defined, but where each such term might lack an article.  This gives a target for links to technical words in an article to assist readers.  I would thus view it as a reader aid rather than something that falls under the scope of WP:NOT.  At any rate, whether we agree with the existence of these articles or not, AfD doesn't seem to be the right place to come to a decision on that matter.  Personally, I don't really like them, but I'm leaning toward a procedural keep.  I think this issue needs to be argued at the pump or related venue before glossary articles start getting deleted without really plumbing the community on the matter.  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 21:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Respectfully, this is why I transwiki'd first. If it can still be linked to readily, I don't think it matters that much. =) 86.** IP (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't wish to imply that you hadn't done your part. I'm just pointing out that glossaries have long been a part of this project, and probably some wider discussion should be held to decide what to do with them.  It seems better to me if they are all maintained under the same roof.  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 11:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, fair enough. Just seems like, with easy linking to Wiktionary, it makes more sense to host dictionary lists there. 86.** IP (talk) 11:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of branches of alternative medicine, to consolidate the data in one article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - This would be functional, because it's been stated here that the Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine has used List of branches of alternative medicine as part of a navigational menu system. A merge would improve the list article 'List of branches of alternative medicine' and add references to it. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep and restructure per the manual of style so that it's more consistent. Not liking glossaries doesn't change the fact that they are an acceptable form of list.--~TPW 10:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep There are quite a few "Glossary of..." articles. Glossaries have been and still are perfectly valid material to be included in Wikipedia.   Not liking glossaries doesn't change the fact that they are an acceptable form of list.--'''John Gohde (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Purge unreferenced entries. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mostly unsourced dictionary definitions, and redundant to the respective articles, whose lead should contain a definition and overview. WP:MOSGLOSS is a draft and therefore not dispositive.  Sandstein   10:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 10:31, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge Since this is already available in Wiktionary, the non-definitional element of this is a list, which will always be either a (content fork) duplicate or a confusing non-duplicate of List of branches of alternative medicine. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Clearly a set of dictionary definitions. Unencyclopedic. Carrite (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge Why would this need to be deleted? This can be merged to Wiktionary if it doesn't belong here. - M0rphzone (talk) 18:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's already been transwiki'd there, and is just awaiting them to finish the transfer process. 86.** IP (talk) 00:26, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Regardless of what Wiktionary does, we here at Wikipedia normally keep glossary articles.  DGG ( talk ) 02:44, 22 October 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.