Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witch (etymology): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Relisting debate |
vote keep |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
===<!-- insert a section edit --> === |
===<!-- insert a section edit --> === |
||
{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witch (etymology)|[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]|}} |
{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witch (etymology)|[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]|}} |
||
*'''Keep''' A whole article on the etymology of a word. Isn't this what makes Wikipedia a great resource? [[User talk:Francium12|<span style="background:#acf;padding:4px;color:white;text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em"> '''Francium12''' </span>]] 16:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:38, 27 August 2009
- Witch (etymology) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nothing but etymology, which is dictionary content. Also includes unrelated section on the word "Wicca". Powers T 15:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 15:45, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
- Keep A whole article on the etymology of a word. Isn't this what makes Wikipedia a great resource? Francium12 16:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)