Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical 1


 * 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. SNOW  DGG ( talk ) 21:53, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Radical 1

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )



WP:NOTDICTIONARY and all of these are basically just duplicates of their respective wikionary articles, also there isn't much content that can be written that isn't already on the other site--Prisencolin (talk) 00:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 June 11.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 00:38, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:24, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:24, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep all. These are the fundamental units of the Chinese writing system, and there is every bit as much reason to have these as to have the letters of the Latin or Cyrillic alphabets. bd2412  T 04:30, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep all – Per Five pillars, the fundamental principles of Wikipedia, the encyclopedia "combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers" (bold emphasis mine). This is the type of content that is covered in some almanacs, which is part of Wikipedia's purview. North America1000 05:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep all. These are fundamental parts of the writing system in China. They are just as notable as a letter in our language. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 07:33, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep all of these. The articles are distinctive, informative, and plainly encyclopedic. As others have observed, these are fundamental elements of the Chinese system of writing, and the whole set belongs in Wikipedia, just as do the letters of the Roman, Greek and other alphabets. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep all. While some of the articles are somewhat brief, their deletion would be removal of valid encyclopedic content. — crh 23   &thinsp;(Talk) 15:54, 11 June 2016 (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.