Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copious

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. Mindmatrix 03:44, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copious

This is better as a dictionary entry, enhancement to an encyclopedic entry is not realistic Note that I have reviewed the existing Wiktionary entry and somewhat enhanced it, but some of the content here is not verifiable in other sources, and hence is not included in the Wiktionary entry SailorfromNH 01:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Dicdef. Delete, unless something in there is really necessary for the entry already in Wiktionary. Confusing Manifestation 08:44, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, the wiktionary entry is even better than this one. --Pboyd04 02:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, WINAD. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 07:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per reasons above. — TheKMan^talk 10:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Make into soft redirect?. Or delete --Dangherous 20:57, 30 December 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.