Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lacta


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 19:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Lacta

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

DICDEF supported only by the dubious Cardarelli. Not included in Metric prefix which appears to be a solid and well-sourced article; not listed in Oxford English Dictionary (while "kilo-" as a prefix is listed). If any reliable source can be found for this prefix it should be added to Metric prefixes and a redirect made from "Lacta". Pam D  10:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete: Dear me, couldn't we somehow have done these together. This one is at least memorable: I guess it comes from the Indian lakh for 105. There is a similar list of these, totally unsourced, here: ; I guess that once someone put them in a discussion paper or similar. Thank goodness they never caught on. Imaginatorium (talk) 11:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Regardless of the reliability of Cardarelli, something that can be sourced only to a single line of a single table in a single book is not notable. (The same comment applies to all three of the units micri, lacta, and dimi, which should probably have been merged into a single AfD.) —David Eppstein (talk) 22:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable sources show that this dictionary definition satisfies WP:GNG. Johnuniq (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment This one is a good puzzle. Cardarelli doesn't make stuff up and so must be referring to something.  Wolfram Alpha has an entry for the prefix but doesn't say much about it.  Searching for sources is complicated by the numerous references to milk, which get in the way.  I'll keep my eyes out for more leads in the course of related work. Andrew D. (talk) 13:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Cardarelli doesn't make stuff up..." you say? You know this how, I wonder? Does he just copy stuff that other people have made up? (Like the fictional Japanese units?) Imaginatorium (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete As usual, no independent evidence of notability. PianoDan (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2015 (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.