Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girlfriend (0th nomination)

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep

Girlfriend

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. --fvw* 05:33, 2004 Nov 28 (UTC)

• I think it is a bit more than a dictionary entry, but if not, why not put it on Wiktionary:Girlfriend? Brianjd
• Keep: More than dicdef, complements the article on Boyfriend nicely. (how ironic?) Wifki 07:13, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep agree with Wifki - Drstuey 13:02, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Another example of the deletion mania, making everybody lose time on futile debates. --Pgreenfinch 13:08, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • You only lose time if you spend time on a page you hate and enter comments designed to rile people up. Geogre 14:58, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Oops, I'm so sorry I hurted you about the page you love. What about a deletefriend article ? ;-)). --Pgreenfinch 16:26, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Topic is encyclopedic, not just a word. --Hemanshu 18:12, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. This expands on the Wiktionary definition in a way that Wiktionary can't. --Idont Havaname 18:38, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep; too expandible just to consign to the Wiktionary. Samaritan 22:54, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, as with boyfriend. -Sean Curtin 23:05, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Incorrectly listed. Dr Zen 00:18, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep it. Fvw is batting about 50/50 this week. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 05:49, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Already listed in Wiktionary. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Delete. Rossami (talk) 01:57, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Have you read the comments above? This article definitely contains more than what is currently in Wiktionary. Brianjd 07:21, 2004 Nov 30 (UTC)
• Keep, because Wikipedia is not a dictionary and this article is beyond the scope of a dictionary. --[[User:GRider|GRider\^talk]] 20:51, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Article as it stands isn't great, but I can't see how it's not encyclopedic. After all, why have an entry for marriage when we can just Wiktionary-link it? Lacrimosus 04:30, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Delete most of it: This article (apart from the sentence on the film) is nothing more than the definition and usage of a word. It belongs in a dictionary. Surely we can find more information on the film? Brianjd 05:34, 2004 Dec 1 (UTC)
• Keep, as Hemanshu already brought up the "topic is encyclopedic, not just a word." -- Crevaner 10:12, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - Good points already mentioned above! -- Old Right 11:39, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Transwiki, merge, and redirect, or expand. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. We should have articles about the topic itself, not about a word. Either change the article to describe what a girlfriend is, rather than how the term girlfriend is used, or redirect somewhere (like relationship or something). anthony 警告 12:47, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete This article may have more words than the Wiktionary entry, but it still is nothing more than the definition and usage of a word. The Wiktionary entry gives the same information, just more concise. --L. Pistachio 03:27, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep and remove listing from WP:DA too. --Key45 01:25, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.