Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rope (unit)


 * 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 WP:SNOW Keep. NAC. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 14:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Rope (unit)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD on the basis that the article is a stub and is hence marked. Stub or not, this is nothing more than a dictionary definition, which violates WP:DICDEF. MuZemike ( talk ) 16:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Normally this would be an easy redirect to, say, Imperial units, except that there seems to be no such all-inclusive article for the regional British measures. I'm leaning to keep until such article is established. NVO (talk) 17:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep While I don;t have copies of either publication handy, the reliable and potentially verifiable sources provided appears to satisfy the Wikipedia notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 19:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sources needed to be provided here and now. -- neon white talk 21:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * They're in the article. - Mgm|(talk) 00:21, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Documented Units of measurement are notable, no matter how short the article. Perhaps we could make a list of unusual units of measurement and merge it there, but until then, I see no reason to delete valid information just because it can't be merged yet. Sticking to WP:DICDEF doesn't make WP better in this case. WP:IAR - Mgm|(talk) 00:21, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This article has multiple sources, etc., establishing reliability. Moreover, this is more than a dictionary definition: for example, the OED lists this sense of "rope" as "A stout line used for measuring; a sounding line; hence in later use, a certain measure of length, esp. for walling or hedging. Now local."  Nyttend (talk) 00:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This has example of how this measurement is used, which is encyclopedic information rather than part of a dictionary definition. Notability has been shown by verifiable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Heavily sourced for an article of this size. Edward321 (talk) 23:16, 25 October 2008 (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.