Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of homophonous phrases


 * 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. Jaranda wat's sup 19:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

List of homophonous phrases

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A badly-written, almost entirely OR article, that seems to serve no useful purpose.Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information OZOO (What?) 13:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, this list violates WP:NOT. Panoptical 13:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. This list is original research, some of which sounds like nonsense: "Foul fowl foul fowl foul foul foul fowl."  Does not seem encyclopedic.  Useight 15:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: For those interested, I've opened up a discussion on whether or not it is prudent to make an official policy or guideline to be used in regards to the creation and retention of lists: Village pump (policy) Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic, and my apologies for the somewhat off-topic comment. Sidatio 16:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete All OR, and per nom. •Malinaccier• T / C  18:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Useight. GreenJoe 20:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Tongue twisters or Wordplay or something similar; simple solution for something that doesn't merit it's own article, yet makes a comment on the importance of syntax. That that is is that that is not is not is that it yeah but this is not.  Mandsford 22:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP is not a directory of homophonous phrases Corpx 04:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom., and all comments in agreement.--JayJasper 13:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is not short on disk space. --Mwongozi 17:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge the important and linguistically researched (and, thus, referenced) examples into homophonous, delete the rest. Also, "had had" deserves its own page (if it can be references), just like the ones "buffalo..." and "Lion-eating poet..." have --Cubbi 22:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. I don't know how it can ever be anything but OR. --Storm Rider (talk) 22:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge -- given the "buffalo..." and "Lion-eating poet..." pages, this isn't just a normal OR list, but a valid linguistic oddity. Maybe merge into wordplay. Agree that Had had had... deserves its own page. If you can&#39;t stand as a good example, then you&#39;ll just have to serve as a horrible warning. 12:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -- This is useful material that can be built up into a proper article of its own. --Mac 13:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I've put the article here, which is the best place I've been able to find for it so far.  Citi Cat   ♫ 01:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You should not just copy/paste it, because edit history has to be preserved (through a transwiki) for GDFL purposes Corpx 02:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm attempting to contact the sysop there, don't know if the project is still maintained.  Citi Cat   ♫ 13:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom seems to be OR Harlowraman 02:56, 20 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.