Talk:Glossary of sculpting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Transfer to Wiktionary and delete?

  • If this article were called List of sculpting terms, the question probably would not arise. This article should be regarded as a set of stubs. Some have already achieved full article status, but most of the others will never be big enough to have an article of their own. These are all encyclopaedic terms that deserve more than a simple dictionary definition. Keep - --Concrete Cowboy 18:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree with Concrete Cowboy that we should Keep this page. Glossaries on Wikipedia are integrated into Wikipedia - the links lead to Wikipedia articles. Wiktionary glossary entries lead to Wiktionary articles. Therefore glossaries can serve as navigation aids on both - this is not an either or issue. Transwiki Wikipedia glossaries to your heart's content, but keep them on Wikipedia too. Stop crippling Wikipedia by deleting its encyclopedia-linked triple-function glossaries. Glossaries on Wikipedia serve as vocabulary learning aids and as topic identification lists and as navigation aids. Keep 'em.  The Transhumanist   04:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)

Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.

Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 16:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)