Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thick and thin (phrase)


 * 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 following transwikification to Wiktionary. WjBscribe 05:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thick and thin (phrase)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The creator moved this from a perfectly decent disambiguation page here. It will never have enough substance for a stand-alone article. Wiktionary is not a home since it is a phrase not a word and the Wikiquote would only be suitable if a specific quote is found (the example is just made up). I see no merit in a redirect since the article title will never be the search term. If deleted, I will restore the previous version of Thick and thin. Delete. TerriersFan 01:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You created the page Thick and thin, someone changed it, and now you want Thick and thin (phrase) deleted so you can restore your original version? Just revert. But now it's here, Delete. The disambiguation page isn't much better either, there is little point in creating a disambiguation page when no articles by that name even exist yet. Croxley 03:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all pointless/useless/nonsense. /Blaxthos 05:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all for the same 3 reasons stated by Blaxthos. Speedything 11:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I had not realised that it should have appeared in the wiktionary - sorry. So you should revert to [] - Curious Gregor - Synthesis for all 13:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to Wiktionary - I had not realised it was possible. - Curious Gregor - Synthesis for all 15:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to Wiktionary Just a quick reply to the nom, but the number 1 bullet pointed policy of Wiktionary is that "| it is a dictionary, thesaurus and phrase-book. So a phrase like "thick and thin" is perfectly acceptable as a Wiktionary entry. Dugwiki 17:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary per above. — Pious7Talk Contribs 20:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki per above. -- Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  02:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Let Wiktionary write its own, it's rubbish. Jobjörn  (Talk ° contribs) 23:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WINAD after the article has been transwikied. Already tagged as such.  As for the disambig page, a selective revert to a previous version should do. -- Black Falcon 05:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It has now been transwikied. Jobjörn  (Talk ° contribs) 16:25, 28 March 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.