Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Half-month

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The result was nomination withdrawn and keep because the article has been substantially improved. YechielMan 00:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Half-month (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

[edit] Half-month

Fails WP:OR. I looked for evidence that astronomers use the term "half-month" in the precise sense that the article implies. I have not yet found such evidence. This is one of the easier articles to rescue from Afd - just provide one source, and it can stay. But I wasn't able to do that myself. YechielMan 02:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Ganfon 02:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I have attempted to find a source for this from some text I have, and the internet. I am unable to find sourcing for this term. The articles author is encouraged to provide sourcing. Navou ^banter / _{review me} 02:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep but correct error. A half-month in astronomy is not defined as in the article, but as specified in this source and this source (the second is from NASA, don't tell me it's not reliable). --N Shar 06:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Query A little confused, you speak of a one time mention in an asteroid/space object naming convention, thats not wide use, if thats the only context. Navou ^banter / _{review me} 14:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per N Shar. The half-month or (perh. more often) halfmonth just denotes the first or second half of a month (days 1-15, days 16-end) for certain observations. A bit of a dicdef, but worth explaining. I've never seen the precise version given in the article used. --Dhartung | Talk 10:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note, it's also a somewhat archaic term in accounting. --Dhartung | Talk 10:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - I managed to find a couple of usage examples in astronomy articles, so keep, but please please someone expand the article; maybe it belongs in wiktionary? Roadmr (t|c) 16:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Unreferenced pointless stub article. Nothing but a dictionary definition. Should we add "Quarter month," "Eighth month," "Sixteenth month," etc., ad infinitum? Inkpaduta 17:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep It's useful as an astronomy term. Also as noted, it's a useful accounting term. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 18:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It is dicdef and will only live a stubby half-life. </humor> Fundamental Dan 19:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Withdraw nomination and keep. Thanks especially to N Shar, I was able to rewrite the article into a respectable stub without original research. I've never done a non-admin closure before, but I'm going to try one now. Let me know on my talk page if I mess up. YechielMan 23:50, 8 February 2007 (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.