Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ritter von


 * 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.  Nish kid 64  02:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Ritter von

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Verrry trivial information, does not justify an article of its own as all the information contained in the article is given in Ritter and von, and it is highly unlikely the article will ever grow beyond its current stage. doco ( ☏ ) 01:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Interesting etymology, but all it describes is a name. I suggest a Transwiki - does Wiktionary deal with this? --Dennisthe2 03:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It's lacking in info, I struggle to see how this would be encyclopaedic or dictionary worthy. -- Greaser 08:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - "Knight" in German is Ritter (and in an unusual usage ein Retter in der Not =a knight in shining armour), so I'd need to see proof of the odd spelling offered. Also, in Dutch there appear to be two common words, ridder (which matches the use in the article) and paard in schaakspel.  Again, some proof of the eytomology needs to be provided.   SkierRMH, 10:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, trivial etymology, belongs to Wiktionary if anywhere. &mdash; mark &#9998; 12:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 10:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions.  -- Agathoclea 11:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Highly trivial, and rather clumsily named to boot. Peter Isotalo 13:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as too trivial. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. J I P  | Talk 15:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete We already have an article on Ritter which seems to me to explain the term far more clearly. Jcuk 17:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.--Rudjek 23:07, 13 January 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.