Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roth (onomastics)
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 of the debate was delete Wald (onomastics) wasn't included formally in this afd so it stays, I suggest WP:PROD-ing it if anything. W.marsh 16:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Roth (onomastics)
Per talk page, extreme form of listcruft - irrelevant, obscure subject, without hope of rescuing page into anything suitably encyclopaedic DWaterson 19:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak delete My delete vote is only a "weak" one because I can't figure out what the hell this page is actually trying to tell me (and yes, I read its talk page, too). Per nom, it is just to be an indiscriminate list of names. -- Kicking222 21:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Kicking222, also note large portions in what appears to be a combination of German and east European languages, possibly Polish and Hungarian. Jammo (SM247) 23:46, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --Metropolitan90 03:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I added the confusing clean-up tag to the Roth article. I have no opinion one way or the other as to whether it should stay or go, but I found this page; Wald (onomastics), which is very similar, with all the same problems as the Roth article, and is by the same author. If one goes, so should the other, and if one stays, so should the other. I've not listed it for deletion or done anything with it though. ONUnicorn 16:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oh dear... :) DWaterson 19:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete I can only assume that this article was meant to be a combination etymology and disambiguation for anything that begins with the Roth prefix. There are many English articles that start with the same prefix but we don't have a page for "pre" or "con". --Freyr 20:45, 15 June 2006 (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.
