Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pellmell

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. --Tikiwont 10:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pellmell

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

WP:NOT#DICTIONARY Captain panda 02:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, Wikipedia is a compendium. Bensaccount 02:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - it is a dictionary definition - WP:NOT#DICTIONARY indicates that an article should be more than this. Also, it's already in wiktionary [1], so not worthwhile transwiki'ing. Hal peridol 03:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Duh, per above. - Rjd0060 04:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Wikipedia is not Wiktionary, and this particular word is not encyclopedic per se. Antelan ^talk 06:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: per Antelan MatthewYeager 06:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It's a great word that I like to use, but it's perfect for Wiktionary - not Wikipedia. --Gwern (contribs) 16:11 7 November 2007 (GMT)
• Delete per nom. --AliceJMarkham 12:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete but in a straightforward fashion, not in a pellmell way. Bearian 23:00, 8 November 2007 (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.