Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikispeak

Wikispeak - move to meta. RickK 23:56, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Disagree - these are terms that get used on Wikipedia project pages quite frequently and can be a little impenetrable to new users. The page should be moved to Wikispeak instead. -Sean Curtin 04:38, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * That's what "move to meta" means. :) RickK 05:04, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Four of the terms are just Wikimedia project names, and the rest are self-explanatory. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 05:01, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Wikify and Stubify and even Wikimeet are not at all self explanatory (before reading it, I thought it meant somehow "meeting" on a wiki), and the rest are certainly useful for new users. And besides, there is plenty of info in wikipedia that is "self explanatory," it does not hurt to centralize common knowledge though...  Agree with proposed move -- siroxo 12:57, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: It's interesting IMO that the definition of Wikify currently listed differs significantly from the one first proposed (by a relative newbie) and apparently accepted by several experienced hands who visited the page along the way. It's not just useful to newbies IMO, I've learned from it already. Andrewa 14:39, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * It's also redundant with Glossary. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 17:20, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikispeak, not to Meta. It's not the same thing at all, you need a separate signon for the Meta and it serves all the Wikipedias and some related projects. Certainly needs some work but I think it's a great idea. Andrewa 05:16, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * This glossary is valid for more than just en.wikipedia so meta is much more appropriate. Separate signon is a not a big deal - new account creation takes about 10 seconds and then you can forget about it. Pcb21| Pete 13:20, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Could also merge with Glossary, as Cyrius pointed out the overlap -- siroxo 15:12, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Terms here should appear in the Wikipedia glossary too, certainly, and the pages should each link to the other, but this page has a narrower focus. Possibly the lists should be merged. I do notice that the author of this page seems not to have known that the Wikipedia glossary existed, and following the link they gave to glossary, which redirects, there's a link to the Wikipedia glossary but it's right at the bottom of the page. Perhaps this link should be promoted, especially since there's currently no article on glossary as such. There are good links elsewhere to the Wikipedia glossary. Andrewa 00:54, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)