Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Konstantynopolitańczykowianeczka

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was deleted after information merge. FCYTravis 06:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Konstantynopolitańczykowianeczka
Foreign dictionary reference, "longest word in Polish". Aaron Brenneman 13:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Exactly the reverse of the way that this information should be presented in an encyclopaedia, since it requires the reader to already know the information in order to even find it. Rename to Polish words with uncommon properties in order to parallel English words with uncommon properties. Uncle G 14:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Rename--Witkacy 14:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge with some other article as per Uncle G. On its own, it's not noteworthy (for English WP at least, and only because it's supposedly the longest word in Polish, is it likely noteworthy in pl:WP).  Tomer TALK  15:13, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete As is, there is no way to verify this potentially original research, though it is listed as part of a famous tongue twister on wikiquote. -Harmil 18:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - foreign dicdef, but maybe it deserves to be in some long word list or the "polish words with uncommon properties", as stated above. -mysekurity 19:35, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the article to duplicate the style of English words with uncommon properties. The article is now a  ready to be renamed if that is the consensus. Uncle G 00:58, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete foreign dicdef. JamesBurns 08:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename per Uncle G. Xoloz 09:06, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, but merge info to Polish_language - Nabla 04:19, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I, boldly, did it... Nabla 04:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I move to speed up the VfD (regardless of the fact that I have no doubt that my motion will not be taken up, especially since it's now well-past the relevant period for a speedy.  :-p  )...  Tomer TALK  09:33, July 17, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.