Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TLAs from AAA to DZZ

Was on VfD before, discussion from then follows. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 00:14, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC) ''moved from main vfd page. Rossami''


 * TLAs from AAA to DZZ, TLAs from EAA to HZZ,TLAs from IAA to LZZ,TLAs from MAA to PZZ,TLAs from QAA to TZZ,TLAs from UAA to XZZ,TLAs from YAA to ZZZ - These list are of little use, and don't belong in an encyclopedia. &mdash;Noldoaran (Talk) 19:36, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: Useful. Optim 19:40, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Useless because they dont organize these words they just list them. Bensaccount 20:23, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. These are useful for maintenance purposes, shows what TLAs are in use, makes it easy to get to "nearby" ones. I use these pages pretty regularly, and I think if other people used them more often, they'd be less likely to make hashed-up messes of TLA connections to articles. Stan 20:33, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful. Maroux 20:36, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)
 * Keep. Really useful. Secretlondon 20:55, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless clutter. Everyking 21:05, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Wik 21:13, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Perl 21:29, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia: namespace. Useful for meta purposes. Anthony DiPierro 21:41, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Why? Because I like 'em. IMHO a very good example of something that's appropriate for a Web encyclopedia though not a print encyclopedia. Dpbsmith 01:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, just as useful as List of people by name etc. - SimonP 02:41, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. No case has been made for deletion. Just BTW, these articles represent a great deal of work by some valued contributors. Andrewa 15:10, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - next will be &quot;list of all four-letter abbreviations&quot;, &quot;list of all five-letter abbreviations&quot;, etc. This isn't a list of real abbreviations but any combination that could ever possibly be an abbreviation. Any reader looking for AAH will search for "AAH" and not "TLAs from AAA to DZZ" - Texture 16:17, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful administration tool. -- Graham  :) 20:59, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Votes or comments below this line
 * Why have you put all these comments about the four-letter acronyms into the VFD for the three-letter acronym pages? &mdash;Stormie 06:04, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know why the old discussion on 4 letter abbreviations is here either, but delete the 3 letter ones too. Wikipedia shouldn't be a database for all possible mathematical combinations or anything like that. How many three-letter combinations are possible with our alphabet is encyclopedic info, but I don't think these lists are. Everyking 11:56, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * TLAs: 17,576 with exactly 3 letters ignoring case, 46,656 if you include digits. FLAs: 456,976 and 1,679,616. Aren't you glad you asked? :-) Kenwarren 20:07, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Probably not, considering that he didn't ask for this info. Re-read carefully :-) --Diberri | Talk 21:48, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, interesting and useful. - SimonP 15:38, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Joyous 15:42, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep though maybe move to wikipedia namespace. Also, I've replaced the old discussion above with the actual deletion discussion for these articles (from ). -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 21:42, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks Graham! &mdash;Stormie 00:36, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Neutral, although tending towards deletion. Delete. How are these more useful than typing in the desired TLA into the search box? I agree with Everyking, plus I haven't seen any evidence of how these lists are useful (or interesting, for that matter). Also, how could these articles possibly "represent a great deal of work" by anyone (as Andrewa stated above)? A 30-sec Perl script could accomplish this quite easily. --Diberri | Talk 01:21, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cribcage 03:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. - Kenwarren 04:12, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Wikipedia: namespace. Given that the pages survived the previous listing by almost a 3:1 margin, I wonder how legitimate it is to relist them for deletion. -Sean Curtin 06:12, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Wikipedia: namespace. -- The Anome 09:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful. bbx 10:57, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Far more useful and informative than many of the inaccurate and incomplete lists on Wikipedia that are constantly in desperate need of cleanup. I've used these often once I discovered them and keep planning to pull out books with many abbreviations and update them. Jallan 17:30, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have used them as a resource before. Rmhermen 21:29, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. God knows acronyms are the bane of our lives - having a reference to determine what Mr. Smartypants was talking about in trying to impress me never hurts. Denni &#9775; 01:13, 2004 Jul 29 (UTC)
 * Keep, clearly. Jgm 03:12, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 13:06, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, I agree with Diberri, char a,b,c; for(a = 'A'; a <= 'Z'; a++) for(b = 'A'; b <= 'Z'; b++) for(c = 'A'; c <= 'Z'; c++) fprintf(fp,"%c%c%c",a,b,c);. Very useless list since TLAs are created all the time, and anyone who wants a TLA lookup will search for it.
 * Keep - David Gerard 12:37, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. For those of you who think searching replaces these, they are also useful for a negative search.  IE, I have invented something or started my own company and want a TLA that isn't being used.  Just look at the red links.The Steve 14:17, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

Results: concensus to keep. DJ Clayworth 16:33, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)