Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Religious ejaculations


 * 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 of the debate was merge and redirect to Ejaculation (grammar).  howch e  ng   {chat} 17:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Religious ejaculations
dicdef, if that; should not be in plural, and not really any different from Ejaculation (grammar) Flapdragon 04:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's an article for creation, give it more than a minute or two. Kappa 04:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. -- JJay 04:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Would you care to clarify your reasoning? Kappa 04:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't realize it was being worked on. -- JJay 04:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it will be expanded but the requester gave a good explanation and it can be harmlessly redirected if not. Kappa 04:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I just read the request, but still tend to agree with the nom here. Will refrain from voting because I'm not sure. -- JJay 05:00, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep or Merge with Ejaculation (grammar). Jcuk 22:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. ERcheck 04:55, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge first sentence with Ejaculation (grammar). --Apostrophe 05:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge the first sentence- and only the first sentence, with Ejaculation (grammar). The rest is original research.  I Googled it and saw an educational website using the term, so it perhaps doesn't deserve complete deletion, but in its current state it shouldn't be kept.  CanadianCaesar 06:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Just because the article title is hilarious. Jabo 07:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per Apostrophe. Movementarian 08:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Move, Merge and Redirect The article title should be Religious ejaculation. I find no harm in having the title remain, although the content of the article in its current state certainly doesn't warrant its own article. WAvegetarian (talk) (email)   (contribs) 08:22, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep maybe move to Pious ejaculation which is a term which appears in Wuthering Heights, Bret Harte and Mark Twain.  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  12:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge / redirect and expand at Ejaculation (grammar); at least for the time being. At least the first sentence is valid content; and a fair amount could be written on the cultural practice of using these semi-impromptu responses in religious ceremonies.  Smerdis of Tlön 05:23, 19 December 2005 (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.