Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Re
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 No consensus. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-11 05:23Z
Wikipedia is not a (Greek) (slang) dictionary. This article may belong in Wiktionary. Macrakis 16:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. (and as for Malakas). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- it isn't a dicdef, and provides detailed encyclopedic info on the usage and history of the phrase. We have articles on other foreign phrases in common use, e.g. Mea culpa. I think that WP:WINAD is sometimes over-used at AfD. Walton monarchist89 17:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Mea culpa is used in English, re isn't. Even an English dictionary wouldn't include "re". We're not a Greek-English dictionary. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That an article isn't short doesn't make it any less an article that comprises solely etymology, usage notes, and example sentences for a Greek word. Those are all dictionary article content. "dictionary" and "short" are not synonyms. Uncle G 18:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Walton monarchist89, you claim in the Malakas AFD discussion that there's evidence that 're' is used in English. Where is the evidence? Is it in any English-language dictionaries? Anecdotes are original research. --Macrakis 20:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - sorry, my mistake, I was getting it mixed up with another word. Walton monarchist89 20:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - article is a dictionary defintion, and the word itself is not even in use in the English language. -- Whpq 18:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -- wrong project. This goes to el:wiktionary. Jkelly 18:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Reynolds number. Readro 20:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but I promise to rewrite it to "assert notability" if kept (which I planned to do anyway, but it never got high enough to my priority list). The interesting thing about it is that it's an (next-to-meaningless) interjection common to all languages of Balkan language union. See the reference [1]; as such, it's an interesting ammendment ({{main}}) to the said article. I agree that, as written now, it comes to a dicdef. Disclosure: I'll invite (only) our administrator and expert on the issue to comment. Duja► 08:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- weak keep as per Duja (and, yes, he notified me.) - the argument that it's not English doesn't count for me. Enwiki is an encyclopedia in English, but not about English, so if there's anything encyclopedic to be said about the word, it is relevant no matter what language it's part of. But the article should be not about its usage in Modern Greek. That, like with "malakas", is really just for wiktionary. It should be about its status as a marker of the Balkan Linguistic Union. As such, it's been the object of specialised research and thus verifiable and (borderline) notable. I wouldn't mind a merger into the BLU article though. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Duja, thanks for the pointer to the Brian Joseph article -- interesting, but it doesn't change my opinion about having a "Re" article in WP. Joseph's article is an extensive and fascinating study of the etymology of re/vre/etc., true, but I don't see why it argues for an independent article on the subject in WP. The article is certainly relevant to the Balkan Linguistic Union article, and probably to an article about informal terms of address (do we have one?). The fact that it is a Greek word is not central -- it is that it is not about a concept, but about a word. To be clear, I don't think we should have articles about individual English words and phrases like "you know", y'all (which does currently have a WP article), irregardless, etc. To the extent they belong in an encyclopedia, they belong in articles about Southern English or English discourse markers or Prescriptiveness in English usage or whatever. --Macrakis 17:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that I basically omitted the weak (keep) part just because I wanted to sound firmer in comparison to the opposers; personally, I lean to the deletionist side, and this is IMO a borderline case, with no clear precedents and policies to judge on. In this case, I find the phenomenon widespread and interesting enough (WP:ILIKEIT, I know) to deserve an exception (merging into the BLU article is also an option, though it's fairly long). The word (bre) is also one of Serbian cultural icons/stereotypes, and I myself wondered about its etymology until I stumbled upon that article. Duja► 08:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(P.S. link to the article was originally provided by FP, I was just a messenger.)
- Note that I basically omitted the weak (keep) part just because I wanted to sound firmer in comparison to the opposers; personally, I lean to the deletionist side, and this is IMO a borderline case, with no clear precedents and policies to judge on. In this case, I find the phenomenon widespread and interesting enough (WP:ILIKEIT, I know) to deserve an exception (merging into the BLU article is also an option, though it's fairly long). The word (bre) is also one of Serbian cultural icons/stereotypes, and I myself wondered about its etymology until I stumbled upon that article. Duja► 08:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Duja, thanks for the pointer to the Brian Joseph article -- interesting, but it doesn't change my opinion about having a "Re" article in WP. Joseph's article is an extensive and fascinating study of the etymology of re/vre/etc., true, but I don't see why it argues for an independent article on the subject in WP. The article is certainly relevant to the Balkan Linguistic Union article, and probably to an article about informal terms of address (do we have one?). The fact that it is a Greek word is not central -- it is that it is not about a concept, but about a word. To be clear, I don't think we should have articles about individual English words and phrases like "you know", y'all (which does currently have a WP article), irregardless, etc. To the extent they belong in an encyclopedia, they belong in articles about Southern English or English discourse markers or Prescriptiveness in English usage or whatever. --Macrakis 17:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Definitely keep for three reasons:
- Per Duja's argument, which I had not thought (The interesting thing about it is that it's an (next-to-meaningless) interjection common to all languages of Balkan language union).
- Because like malakas (whose proposed renaming I regard as a huge mistake), re is not just a "dictionary word", but something more, it is an symbolic element of the neo-hellenic culture. If the article is saved and Duja starts improving it, I promise that I'll also help.
- I don't understand why we have to chase all non-English terms from Wikipedia.--Yannismarou 20:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I created sections in the article, I cited some parts (by the way, one of the best Greek encyclopedias, The Helios, has an article for "vre"), and I created a new chapter for the expression "re gamwto" with emphasis on the legendary expression of Patoulidou "Gia thn Ellada, re gamwto" ("For Greece damm it!).--Yannismarou 21:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Έλα ρε, τώρα. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 05:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep re! Notable, used, and a word uniting Balkanians for that matter! NikoSilver 11:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Dammit; I notified Fut.Perf. only via e-mail just because I knew entire Greece has his talk page watchlisted, but I didn't take into account that the Epsilon Team has supernatural powers and acts like one mind and thus WP:CANVASS is futile. Duja► 12:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Re you forget it was I that I pointed to you the existence of the article? Despite that, I missed it from my (huge) watchlist! It was a hint in the malakas afd that brought me here... NikoSilver 14:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As malakas, I missed both articles. But, one day, I saw the malakas AfD in Nicos' watchlist. And I thought: "no, re!" And I realized I had to stop the malakia, and do something. I thus decided to raise the banner of resistance: "for malakas, re gamoto!" And then I did a click in Macrakis talk page, and I learned about this AfD. And I thought again: "no, re gamoto!" I had a discussion with myself and I told him: "vre you, we must act here!" And he answered to me: "re malaka, stop speaking and do something". And here I am!--Yannismarou 19:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- LOL, it's just a pity the closing admin will in all likelihood not be able to understand all the finer overtones of this very nuanced discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- D'oh, all three of our admins voted here; we should have spared one for the closing
:-)... bad tactics. Duja► 16:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- D'oh, all three of our admins voted here; we should have spared one for the closing
- LOL, it's just a pity the closing admin will in all likelihood not be able to understand all the finer overtones of this very nuanced discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As malakas, I missed both articles. But, one day, I saw the malakas AfD in Nicos' watchlist. And I thought: "no, re!" And I realized I had to stop the malakia, and do something. I thus decided to raise the banner of resistance: "for malakas, re gamoto!" And then I did a click in Macrakis talk page, and I learned about this AfD. And I thought again: "no, re gamoto!" I had a discussion with myself and I told him: "vre you, we must act here!" And he answered to me: "re malaka, stop speaking and do something". And here I am!--Yannismarou 19:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Re you forget it was I that I pointed to you the existence of the article? Despite that, I missed it from my (huge) watchlist! It was a hint in the malakas afd that brought me here... NikoSilver 14:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Dammit; I notified Fut.Perf. only via e-mail just because I knew entire Greece has his talk page watchlisted, but I didn't take into account that the Epsilon Team has supernatural powers and acts like one mind and thus WP:CANVASS is futile. Duja► 12:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Fut.Perf. has made to my understanding a valid argument. "Enwiki is an encyclopedia in English, but not about English, so if there's anything encyclopedic to be said about the word, it is relevant no matter what language it's part of". If this article is to be deleted based on the argument that it is not english or used in english then wiki should start thinking about deleting Beylik, Devshirmeh, Ghilman, Dhimmi to name a few. Aristovoul0s 18:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete article is a kind of dictionary defintion. The word is not in use in the English language. --MaNeMeBasat 09:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Τι έγινε ρε παιδιά; :-p --xvvx 21:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Per FuturePerfect. /FunkyFly.talk_ 05:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.