Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiktionary


 * 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 of the debate was KEEP. Gamaliel 03:08, 8 June 2005

Wiktionary
Vanity. Delete. Ketsuban (is 1337) 23:35, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not vanity. Bogus nomination. Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 23:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * How is it not vanity? Ketsuban (is 1337) 00:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. -- BD2412 talk 00:27, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)
 * Keep the wikicruft. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:14, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Same user as Votes for deletion/Godzilla. Deliberate disruption. --Tabor 01:57, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable online dictionary. Capitalistroadster 02:02, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep a sister project of Wikipedia is a sister project. --Chill Pill Bill 02:13, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * And vanity is vanity. Would there be an article on Wiktionary if it weren't a sister project of Wikipedia? Of course not. Ketsuban (is 1337) 02:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep of course. Antandrus  (talk)  02:16, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do you really think it's appropriate to waste everyone's time to prove a point?  Go gripe on irc or the pump. Gamaliel 03:08, 8 Jun 2005 (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.