Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Unicode characters


 * 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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Unicode characters

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

If this list would be complete, it would be well over 1 MB large, besides, there's another such list on Wikibooks. Prince Kassad 20:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep It is incomplete, but we could possibly transwiki the list from Wikibooks to here. - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here) | HISTORY 18:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * keep or move to Wikipedia space 132.205.44.134 00:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * delete it is too incomplete to be useful, See the Unicode article for a list of better tables. DGG 07:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * We could always copy the list from Wikibooks. - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here) | HISTORY 19:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * &emsp; Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  &emsp; Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 08:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - serves no useful purpose given that all this information is easily accessible from the character map. In an incomplete form it's pointless, and in a complete form it will be unmanageably long. A goodly chunk of the characters won't even display correctly on most people's computers, anyway. If it must be kept, keep it as a character map style grid, rather than this sprawling laundry list -  irides centi   (talk to me!)  11:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is an ISO standard. See other members of Category:ISO standards or even List of ISO standards. See also Unicode - jc37 13:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - this article is clearly useful and the space on wikipedia doesn't seem to be a problem (note how many pages of history there are for some articles). Dean Sayers 19:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - While this could have been Speedy'd at the beginning (as it was obviously work in progress), I think it is 'full enough' to stay. Of course, the other options are:
 * Move to Userspace
 * Keep article, but split it up, i.e. List of Unicode characters 0000-0999 List of Unicode characters 1000-1999 etc etc (this helps with the space problem).
 * Personally I'd sooner split it up but only as a secondary option to keeping. --NigelJ talk SIMPLE 20:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep but split as NigelJ suggests. The entire Unicode code space is clearly too large to fit into a single article. -- BPMullins | Talk 21:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but limit to the standardized subsets. &mdash; RJH (talk) 20:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, with the possibility of spliting. Not sure how large this format would make the list.  Then again, we could REALLY go nuts, and in the process rename to Table of Unicode characters --NigelJ talk SIMPLE 08:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep as no convincing arguments have been presented for the deletion of this list; encyclopedias can and do provide tables of this sort, and there is no reason that an electronic encyclopedia, not bound by the limits of paper, cannot do the same. Burntsauce 17:03, 25 April 2007 (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.