Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Year pronunciation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Boldly merged and redirected to names of numbers in English. Peyna 20:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] year pronunciation

Not encyclopedic. Hardee67 01:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep. Interesting subject. Georgia guy 01:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --Hyphen5 01:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC) Speedy delete because the author (below -- see user:CrazyInSane) has requested deletion. --Hyphen5 18:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's OR, for one. Also, this theory applies to any number. Should we create a page detailing how people all over the world say their telephone numbers? Peyna 02:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete due to OR. Erechtheus 04:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, WP:OR. Doesn't include the old-tymie aught, like for 19-aught-6. Balderdash! --Kinu t/c 05:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as WP:OR -- Whpq 13:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. This was nominated by the Afd vandal Hardee67. Georgia guy 15:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, is WP:OR no matter who nominated it. Sandstein 16:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Please explain. I can't find any original research in the article. Georgia guy 16:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
It is presumed to be OR because it stipulates that a certain pronounciation is "the preferred English language method" and it has no sources for this assumption. Per the second sentence of WP:NOR:
Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to demonstrate that you are not doing original research is to cite reliable sources which provide information that is directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say.
-- Sandstein 16:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I have reworded the article. Checking it, please note that Google search on "two thousand" "twenty ten" reveals lots of articles that talk about year pronunciation. Georgia guy 16:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
In addition, I've also been cleaning up this article more. Check what the article now looks like. Georgia guy 16:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Can't see any substantial difference. There's still not one source cited in the article, and assertions like "Most common pronunciation method" certainly need sources. My vote stands. Sandstein 17:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Change my vote to merge. I merged the table into Names of numbers in English, which this article should be merged with. Georgia guy 17:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as the creator of this article. When I created this article, I intented to find citations but could find none. I agree it is OR, however did not intend to implement AfD myself. — `CRAZY`(IN)`SANE` 17:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Names of numbers in English, which has already been done. Its rather enclyopedic to know that we, in this day and age, did not pronounce 2006 as two-thousand-six. But with that said, need to verify that this happened. The stuff from before 1900 needs some verification though. Kevin_b_er 18:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    • "did not pronounce 2006 as two-thousand-six"? I pronounce it as two-thousand-six, I thought everyone does. — `CRAZY`(IN)`SANE` 18:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Yeah, that's true. Two thousand (and) six is definitely how 2006 is most commonly pronounced. Voortle 20:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. What about pronunciation of room numbers, people's telephone numbers, house numbers etc. Voortle 20:03, 12 August 2006 (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.