Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypothetical mood


 * 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) – Davey 2010 Talk 23:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hypothetical mood

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTDICT Prisencolin (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  02:14, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't quite understand how this article is a dictionary entry. It sure could do with expansion, but it gives a definition of "what the subject is" (i.e. indicating a statement that could have been true) in accordance with the nutshell on WP:NOTDICT. Are you referring to a specific section of that policy? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:44, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  17:29, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The nomination could have provided an argument for deletion instead of a vague wave. Andrew D. (talk) 17:44, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - This seems like an ideal merge candidate so that the good information is put somewhere else such that we have a nice set of different linguistic moods defined one after the other in the same place, but I'm not at all familiar with the various articles on linguistics. The merge target... I have no idea. As for right now, this is something more than a mere dictionary entry as stated above. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:22, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment seems like there isn't much information I could find about this, although maybe it's due a lack of English language sources on this seeing as English doesn't have a hypothetical mood.--Prisencolin (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2016 (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.