Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Here

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 delete and move here (disambiguation) to here. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Here

Here (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This page is a dictionary definition with some generally irrelevant fluff added, the type that could be written about any word. I don't see much potential for expansion, and think that the legitimate parts of the article can be dealt with concisely at Here (disambiguation). It should be deleted, and the disambiguation page moved here to replace it.

To expand on the above... the entire "In science" and "In Religion and philosophy" sections should probably be removed even if the article is kept. The etymology and further cogitation on the meaning of "here" have some merit as sections, if the article as a whole was deemed worthy of keeping... but I'm not convinced that this is a word with a history (and hence, encyclopedic content) like Truthiness, and articles are generally supposed to have more than just usage instructions. I think that most of it can be handled at deixis/deitic expression, and hence I've linked the term in the intro at Here (disambiguation), along with referencing the Old English roots and adding to the See also section. SnowFire 02:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Wikipedia is not a dictionary or usage guide. Powers ^T 03:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Move Here (disambiguation) here (where?). I just mean that this here page would be a good place to have a disambiguation page here. Are were clear? --W.marsh 03:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Obviously falls under WP:NOT. Maybe redirect to the dab page?? - Rjd0060 04:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete and move in the dab page, per all. — Swpb^talk.edits 05:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect to Here (disambiguation). Or, as suggested, move that page to here. This has the link to wikitionary, and also to deixis. I was going to suggest that, but then noticed it's already there. Thanks. Drmaik 05:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 15:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. This article has been the subject of at least one previous deletion discussion, based on essentially the same concern. Here is one of the core items of the English lexicon, and poses grammatical and usage issues that go beyond what a dictionary can cover. Note that we do not yet have an article on place deixis, but what we have here is a start. - -- Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment. If you think there's anything worth merging from this article to the deixis article, then an alternate suggestion could be to move the current Here to Here (word), and then redirect that to deixis. That way, the GFDL will be preserved and all. However, I do still think that this topic would be better covered at the deixis article than here, and deixis is linked right in the first line of the disambiguation page. -- SnowFire (talk) 18:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Redirect or merge I agree with User:Drmaik here (no pun intended) on the redirect. Here does not need its own page. I suggest it be merged into a kinda hybrid between here and there or into a section within the article location. Beast of traal T C _ 03:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Beast of traal

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.