Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Off of


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 22:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Off of
Has been prodded before, but survived. Article still fails WP:WINAD. Has one editor, with a few other people correcting the article. MikeMorley 07:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete wikipedia is not a language how to. -- Koffieyahoo 07:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and get this Out of here - Peripitus (Talk) 08:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WINAD: Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used. The editor states that it is a 'how to' guide in the history as grounds for keeping it. Whoops! (by the way, I hope that the nom isn't implying that having only one editor is grounds for deletion or we are in trouble). Yomangani 10:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment no, I'm not saying single-editor articles are inherently bad. What I meant was that despite a couple of prods the article keeps coming back to a form simillar to the one it is currently in MikeMorley 15:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom.    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  16:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. wikipediatrix 17:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete it off of the Wikipedia. Bhumiya (said/done) 19:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - can't see how this will ever be expanded beyond its current state -- Whpq 20:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Yomangani. In any case, it is standard current practice for dictionaries of the English language to be descriptivist, not prescriptivist (OED is highly descriptivist in its current form and it's considered the ultimate authority). Wikipedia should follow that precedent. Haikupoet 00:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Not sure if transwikiing this is a good idea. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 00:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki or delete. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 20:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * TW or D per above Computerjoe 's talk 20:34, 31 July 2006 (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.