Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Automotive design terminology


 * encyclopedic glossary? Does such a thing even exist?  That seems like a contradiction in terms.  James084 16:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well judging by the existence of Category:Glossaries some people disagree with you. Kappa 17:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well them I don't care about. I'm just shocked that somebody has intelligent as you seem could use such an obvious oxymoron as encyclopaedic glossary with a straight face.  James084 17:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * How would you describe something like List of cricket terms then? Kappa 18:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's easy. I'd call it a glossary.  I don't see anything encyclopaedic about it.  You should have known that.  You and I don't agree on much of anything.  James084 18:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * So are you planning to AFD it, being a mere glossary and all? Kappa 18:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope. I'm too busy poking you with a needle.  James084 18:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You make thing this is all a game, but to me destroying good contributions, wasting other editors' time, and hypocritically picking off weak articles while ignoring strong ones of exactly the same type are not activities to be undertaken in humor. Kappa 18:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is all a game. I think the underlying objective of this project is worthy and good.  I think you take yourself entirely too seriously.  Come on, Kappa, an encyclopaedic glossary?  That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard today.  An encyclopaedia, by definition, can not be a glossary.  That's what Wiktionary is for.  I do get upset that you set such a low standard for the quality of articles that are submitted here.  I'd like to see a much higher standard; but, nevertheless, I respect the community and it's wishes.  I think that's enough "poking you with a needle" for now.  I know there will be plenty of other opportunities.  James084 19:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)