Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leoch


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Leoch

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I PRODded this with the message, "Wikipedia is not a book of baby names and name derivations." The PROD was challenged with the remark, "this is not a name but a celtic word." To that I say, Wikipedia is not a Celtic language dictionary either. Appears to be already at Wiktionary under an alternate spelling.  Glenfarclas  ( talk ) 17:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:NOT. Joe Chill (talk) 17:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Would also appear to be a made-up neologism, not an actual Celtic word: Originates from the celtic word Laoch meaning warrior. This spelling is a variation combining the latin for lion (leo) with the before mentioned name Laoch meaning warrior.  Still, let's all sing a round of Mo Ghile Mear. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Traswiki to Wiktionary per WP:NEO and WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  18:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: the correct Irish and Scottish Gaelic spelling is laoch, and it's already there. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Redirect' to Laoch as a plausible misspelling. Mjroots (talk) 05:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that doesn't work, since Laoch is on another project. I don't think a soft redirect would be particularly useful.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 05:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. While we do have articles on first names at Wikipedia (and rightly so), we do so only on well-established first names with long histories, not names that someone made up one day. At the bottom of the article as it currently stands, there's a note indicating that there's a locality in Scotland called Leoch (just north of Dundee, see and ). An article on that town would be acceptable, but until one is written, there's no reason for this lemma not to be a redlink. +Angr 11:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment What about rewriting to change the article into one on the settlement (which would be notable enough to sustain an article)? Mjroots (talk) 08:37, 13 June 2010 (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.