Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tie me over


 * 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. One (talk) 00:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Tie me over

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

DICT DEF. &eta;oian   &Dagger;orever &eta;ew &Dagger;rontiers  16:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not just a dicdef, but also the opposite of correct usage, according to a source I found: . Per WP:AGF, I'm going to assume that the author of this didn't realize it was incorrect and merely committed original research. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Completely incorrect article that attempts to argue a position that is contrary to accepted English usage.  A good reference to the correct usage and etymology is . JulesH (talk) 06:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the article, which leaves us with one with little meaningful information, so I'd still suggest deletion. JulesH (talk) 06:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary Dicdef alright. Just fine for Wiktionary. Oldlaptop321 (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's already there: tide over. Unless you mean that Wiktionary should have an entry for the incorrect usage, pointing to the correct usage. I guess it should go at tie over? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2009 (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.