Testwiki:Articles for deletion/Boudoir

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 of the debate was delete · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 22:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Boudoir

Delete: Nothing more than a dictionary definition, and boudoir already has an entry in Wiktionary. Ljlego 16:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 18:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep; stub notice indicates non-trivial potential for expansion. Monicasdude 19:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• No it doesn't. Delete dicdef. Eivind^speak! 23:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: per nom. Since it's already in wiktionary, nothing will be lost by deleting it and it can be recreated if further expansion is possible. Stub notice could just as easily mean that someone thought the article was too short as opposed to a carefully-placed notice of future expansion plans (that will likely never occur considering the original notice was placed upon creation almost eleven months ago). —Wknight94 (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand. Category:Rooms should be comprehensive. Hawkestone 02:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: per nom. (wiktionary already) --MaNeMeBasat 08:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Khoikhoi 08:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I can't countenance discriminating against this room when we have around 80 articles in category:rooms. -- JJay 11:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Yeah but it looks like quite a few of those are already real articles with content outside of a simple definition. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Some of them have extensive content now and some of them do not. Of course, none of them started life that way, a fine example being kitchen, which began like this [1] and survived in that state for some months. I would not have argued for the deletion of kitchen, which would have then made it a candidate for csd, any more than I will seek the removal of other verifiable rooms, such as boudoir, all of which can eventually make fine articles. -- JJay 21:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment- I would like to respond to some people who say that this article can be expanded. I say more power to you all. If you can find some information making this article worthy of an encyclopedic entry, then, by all means, post it here. I'm not against this article, I simply believe that, as of this moment, there is nothing that can salvage this article as a room. A Google Search reveals nothing pertaining to the room boudoir, simply many antiquity/room furnishing sites.--Ljlego 01:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• UPDATE: A quick count of the votes indicates that the "score" is 5-3 in favor of deletion, plus one comment leaning towards deletion. Final score is 5 $\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\end{array}$-3.

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.