Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Table of consonants


 * 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   keep. - Philippe 02:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Table of consonants

 * - (|View AfD) (View log)

I guess this might be a convenient place for editors to copy letters to paste elsewhere, but it's not all consonants, as it claims; it includes some non-IPA consonants and consonants not found in normal speech, without distinguishing them; and it's full of non-notable details without any context. Besides it being misleading, what's the point? kwami (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep This table provides useful information. I don't think it should be deleted unless this information is already provided elsewhere in wikipedia. Perhaps it could be merged. The article could be edited to meet the concerns mentioned (e.g. marking non-IPA consonents). Karl (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Response: This is an incomplete and poorly maintained duplicate of information at IPA. The only addition is that, through OR, a few of the diacritics have been combined with some of the letters they can combine with, and laid out explicitly; this gives the impression that these combinations are somehow notable, when in fact some of them may never occur at all, and literally hundreds of consonants which do occur are neglected. It would be unwieldy to list every attested or possible combination of diacritic and letter, which is why it is not done at "IPA", and if we avoid OR and list just the individual letters, then there would be no difference from the IPA charts at all. I think that the fact that some of you find it "impressive" is itself reason for deletion: The table conveys an aura of authority that it does not deserve. If we were to merge it with "IPA", there would be no change that I can see to that article, so it would be the same as deletion. kwami (talk) 18:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC) We should probably consider this together with Table of vowels. That has sound files & such, so might be worth moving to Wikipedia space or something, but it isn't an article. kwami (talk) 19:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC) Okay, I need to mark it as OR, then. kwami (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC) If we keep, which consonants should we include? What are our criteria? kwami (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, and suggest speedy keep. Issues with the article's content don't justify deleting the article, and the page serves a fairly obvious indexing function.  There doesn't seem to be any point to this nomination, either. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 13:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep what's the point, indeed. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: I don't understand it but it certainly has more place in an encyclopedia than an article for every single South-Park episode ever ...... Dendodge  .. Talk Help 16:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Even though probably only a phoneticist could love this stuff, it's sufficiently impressive-looking to convince me it's important. Should be tagged for cites, though. Frank  |  talk  16:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikisource. Not suitable for wikipeida stlye. SYSS Mouse (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as duplicative and misleading, per Kwami. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This is effectively a list of consonants in table form. I don't see how it would be wrong to have a list of consonants, especially since we have articles on virtually all of them; having it in a table seems better yet.  Nyttend (talk) 20:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTREPOSITORY, WP:OR --Faith (talk) 17:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep While article definitely needs improvement, it is a suitable topic for an encyclopedia. Edward321 (talk) 17:53, 11 May 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.