Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by subject I-Z


 * 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. Please take any Transwiki discussions to the appropriate talk page. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

List of collective nouns by subject I-Z

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

List of collective noun definitions. Without sources. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 13:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki those that can be sourced to Wiktionary. Delete the rest. Will (talk) 13:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary- that's what it is there for Lurker  (said · done) 16:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's just this sort of thing that makes Wikipedia interesting and unique. I know that WP:INTERESTING will get me flamed, but I just don't see why this needs to be deleted. Its encyclopedic value is obvious to me. It also has a history going back to 2002; a lot of people have read this and edited it over the years. --Fang Aili talk 14:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm a little undecided as to where this should go. I don't think there's any argument that the information in this page is something we want to keep in the system (be it Wikipedia or Wiktionary); The question is where. My intuition seems to say this is more dictionary-worthy material, but I'm not sure if Wiktionary's format takes lists like this. If not, the list might as well stay here until Wiktionary can accommodate the information in this format. --Brad Beattie (talk) 15:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a annotated list of closely-related words, otherwise known as a "glossary", as permitted by the stand-alone list guideline. It certianly can be copied to Wikitionary, but should not be deleted from here. Also, this should be kept per the WP:CONSENSUS of hundreds of editors who have contributed to all of the collective nouns lists since 2001, most of whom are not being heard from in these discussions. DHowell 03:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per DHowell. Mathmo Talk 23:14, 7 August 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.