Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skip (in record player)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. Even with taking the sockpuppet votes out, it's still a virtual dead heat. Woohookitty 11:25, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Skip (in record player)
Another dicdef, with a couple of examples of people who have used the term. Yawn. &mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 04:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A dictionary definition, belongs in Wiktionary. – AxSkov ( ☏ ) 08:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * If it belongs in Wiktionary, we can at the very least transwiki this extra definition there. - Mgm|(talk) 11:22, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Its best to Keep, it makes sense and i unstand completly. – Ihdd
 * Keep. DO NOT DELETE. I think this entry is decent. – USARock


 * Keep. . – yyygogogo


 * Keep. Finally a good entry- you would be stupid to delete. – Crotters
 * Comment - the above four users are non-existing (not even sockpuppets), and the text was added by User:HelloolleH andy 11:34, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * As if that wasn't already obvious to anyone with any experience in judging AfD's. =) &mdash; J I P | Talk 16:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Doesn't the mention of artists that use skipping in their music lift the article above dicdef? Last Malthusian 12:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - dictdefs belong to wiktionary. I don't see any potential to make it a real article, nor a topic worthy one. andy 12:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - dictdef --G Rutter 12:55, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Dictdef already in Wiktionary. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 13:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly a dictdef! End of story, surely. Peeper 15:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article has clear potential. What causes skipping? What has it been used for? Etc. etc. Also, die, sockpuppets, die. Sdedeo 17:04, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sdedeo, but find a better title. Skip (recording), perhaps, since even as-is we're not discussing just records?  We'd also want to disambiguate with Skip (music), which was my first guess at a name.  &mdash; Lomn | Talk / RfC 18:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * How about "Skip (recording media)" or just "Skip (media)". We should make a disambig page if one doesn't already exist. Sdedeo 18:49, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * transwiktionary as per above Roodog2k (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * delete per above (or transw.) Does not warrant an article. Dottore So 22:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, has more potential to be a decent article than a lot of things we've kept. Tagged it for cleanup. Tito xd 23:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename, the bit about intentionally using skipping in songs could be enlarged making it an encyclopedic entry. --best, kevin · · · Kzollman | Talk · · · 01:05, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sdedeo. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiktionary as per all. Owen&times; &#9742;  01:09, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Gramophone record, which discusses the phenomenon under Gramophone record in more detail than the article under consideration contains. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete! It's a detail of a dicdef. Barely even that. Any detailed info attached is just vinylcruft. / Peter Isotalo 21:21, 11 September 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.