Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hedyot


 * 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   delete. Userfication of the article for transwiki-ing is available upon request.  Jujutacular  talk 19:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hedyot

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Hedyot is a dictionary definition, it should be moved to wiktionary. Gsingh (talk) 06:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete It's not English. Warden (talk) 07:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a definition of a Hebrew word. Some Hebrew words have entered English usage and apply to topics that have received significant coverage in reliable sources.  This is not among those notable Hebrew based topics.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  07:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Are you kidding?? Just because the term hasn't entered "English lexicon" - whatever that is... that doesn't mean it is not notable at all. There are countless concepts in Latin and French etc that the average English speaking jo shmo won't know, but that doesn't make the concept any less valid. This term has an article on JewishEncyclopedia.com for goodness sake. I made the stub in the first place as part of the Missing encyclopedic articles WikiProject (see Jewish Encyclopedia topics). The site is cited as being entirely notable. To combat Gsingh's argument, the shortness of the article in its "dicdef" state doesn't discount the possibility of it becoming a proper encyclopedic article. Also, frankly, Warden's "argument" makes no sense at all. I honestly can't see what the problem is.--Coin945 (talk) 11:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: it's not about anything except the meaning of a word in a non-English language. It's not about the concept described by the word (or either of the concepts). It's a dictionary definition or two. Pam  D  12:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note It goes beyond a dicdef when you start to cite all the concepts in Judaism that include the adjective "hedyot", such as
 * the 'hedyot' judge is one who is not a mumheh expert" http://books.google.com.au/books?id=FDfuAAAAMAAJ&q=Hedyot&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tK8BT6TvI47ImAXux4CxAg&redir_esc=y
 * leshon hedyot meaning 'the language of a commoner'" http://books.google.com.au/books?id=fTIcAAAAMAAJ&q=Hedyot&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tK8BT6TvI47ImAXux4CxAg&redir_esc=y
 * a kohen hedyot - an ordinary priest as opposed to a High Priest http://books.google.com.au/books?id=KcsUAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tK8BT6TvI47ImAXux4CxAg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Hedyot&f=false
 * Leshon hedyot is not to be interpreted as human speech, but refers to the aramaic language http://books.google.com.au/books?id=HjosAAAAIAAJ&q=Hedyot&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q7ABT7bnHezDmQWjxPWVAg&redir_esc=y
 * an unskilled craft (ma'aseh hedyot) http://books.google.com.au/books?id=UwYmAQAAIAAJ&q=Hedyot&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q7ABT7bnHezDmQWjxPWVAg&redir_esc=y
 * Doreshin Leshon Hedyot ("interpreting human speech") http://books.google.com.au/books?id=ElbYAAAAMAAJ&q=Hedyot&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eLEBT5HQOenqmAW59PD2DA&redir_esc=y
 * plus etymology in: [As for GREEK TEXT THAT DOESN'T SHOW UP IN COPYPASTE, which means "private person" in ordinary Greek, it is interesting to note that it appears as a loanword in postbiblical Hebrew and Aramaic (hedyot) with the meaning "commoner," "layman," "unskilled"... http://books.google.com.au/books?id=QE5UhL88eOcC&pg=PA95&dq=Hedyot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q7ABT7bnHezDmQWjxPWVAg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Hedyot&f=false

........ the list goes on and on. I think this topic is very notable as it links together many different concepts within Judaism by explaining their root, and also analysing the concept of "ordinariness" within Judaism.--Coin945 (talk) 13:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete non-English, non-Wikipedia dicdef. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note ...I still fail to see how that fact that the term is "non-English" makes a bit of difference... it's almost as it some people think that English words have more importance than words in other languages... the dicdef argument, i can live with, but the non-English one is ridiculous IMHO.--Coin945 (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Move to wiktionary. It is a notable term but it is nothing more than a term.  Coin945 has given us a nice list of defs that should make an excellent wikitionary entry. Joe407 (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  16:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  16:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Either delete or move to Wiktionary. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, whether in English or whatever language this word comes from. (I'd expect a word from the Mishnah or Talmud to be in Hebrew or Aramaic, rather than Greek as this article implies.) --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I would be persuaded to !vote "keep" if the article were expanded to show how this is in some way a technical term in Judaism, but at the moment the article says little more than "Hebrew word for 'private person' or 'layman'". (Interestingly, the Greek word meaning 'private person' that the Hebrew word is derived from is also the source of the English word idiot.) So I say expand to show encyclopedic relevance, otherwise move to Wiktionary. And if moved to Wiktionary, it will have to be listed under its Hebrew spelling, הדיוט or whatever it is. Angr (talk) 07:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to wiktionary. While there are many foreign words/expressions in Wikipedia, not every one will be notable enough to get an article. Laissez-faire is an obvious inclusion but we wouldn't have an article on every French word. --Ifnord (talk) 15:29, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to wiktionary per WP:WPINAD. Stubbleboy 03:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete because, as pointed out above, only a small number of non-English-related terms are notable enough to deserve treatment in an English-language reference. Failing that, Transwiki to Wiktionary, since this process has been running for fourteen days without anybody choosing to expand the article past dicdef condition. BusterD (talk) 18:50, 16 January 2012 (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.