Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spinescence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was DELETE, since it's been transwikied which was what everyone wanted. -Splashtalk 22:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Spinescence
Simple dictdef, and expansion seems unlikely. transwiki to Wiktionary, which does not yet have an entry on this term. DES (talk) 15:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- Transwiki per nom. It will never be more than a dicdef. --A D Monroe III 01:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete --Rogerd 01:53, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Transwiki. -- Kjkolb 02:54, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Transwiki it is a word [1] --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 04:52, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- keep, likely search/link/categorization term. Listing spinescent organizism is encyclopedic. Kappa 09:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Transwiki - no scope for expansion. --Celestianpower hablamé 12:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Transwikied to spinescence and spinescent. Andrew pmk | Talk 16:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Feel free to just transwiki next time. AFD is not the place to discuss it. - Mgm|(talk) 20:27, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete already-transwikied dictdef. Afd is, in fact, the place to discuss it, if the article's to be deleted afterwards. A redirect to spine (biology) doesn't seem like it would be useful. —Cryptic (talk) 08:47, 9 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
