Talk:Gnostic Vocabulary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think the article is useful. There are many many articles on wikipedia which refer to gnosticism, gnostics or gnostic topics. The gnostic article itself already has a fairly large vocabulary section and that isn't going to be nearly enough. A simple lookup table seems to me to be useful. I can't see any real harm in it and there is considerable need. Wikipedia is not adverse to useful lists. You claim about glossary is not part of wp:not. I see no reason for deletion. jbolden1517^Talk 02:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is covered Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary. Specificly mentions lists, limiting them to disambiguations of words with multiple meanings and multiple articles. Frankly, they should go in the section on Gnosticism. The ones which have main articles are too long and should be shortened, as there is no need to duplicate the information. That would shorten the article and allow the inclusion of additional terms. IPSOS (talk) 02:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with a merger if there is broad support. jbolden1517^Talk 02:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)