Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S

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 speedy keep. I've spent quite a while perusing Special:Contributions/Anhydrobiosis, and have come to the conclusion that this was not a good faith nomination, despite the appearance of the text below. More to come on the administrator's noticeboard. I've removed the merger proposal as well. Uncle G (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S

S (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article on a letter in the English language is unremarkable as just one of many letters in the alphabet. It has no inline citations, is confusing, has a non adequate beginning, and is written like an essay. Spencer Divonn'io the glorious (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep — Sure, it is remarkable. Letter is reliably sourced (look at any Oxford Dictionary or World Book Encyclopedia) as well as encyclopedic and not written like an essay. There is no problem, here. MuZemike (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Ssssssssssssssso voting keep on this one- I'm not sure it really needs an argument why. Although I suppose I could ask... What about "X"? ;) Umbralcorax (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep perfectly appropriate and informative article about the letter-- history, significance, -- just like in paper encyclopedias. Not being paper, perhaps we can expand it. DGG (talk) 18:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I've got a better idea: perhaps we should merge the individual articles on letters into sections of the broader Latin Alphabet article.Spencer Divonn'io the glorious (talk) 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep as the subject easily clears the notability and verifiability. Nominator placed a number of tags on this article in apparent bad faith. - Dravecky (talk) 20:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Time to snowball keep. Why would anyone single out S and keep the rest? NVO (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.