I don't care so much if my article is deleted as long as it's given a chance. Thanks/ wangi 13:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC) Reply First I would like to thank you for redirecting the Taint article to the Articles for deletion page. It's also worth looking at an earlier version of the article: Thanks/ wangi 18:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Reply Ok, have AfD'd this article as you suggested: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taint. Thank you very much for your time and the links that you sent me.- Cenestrad 20:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC) Reply Hi, I still think the real problem here is that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, which is an official policy on Wikipedia (and just because some other word has slipped through I don't see that as a good reason to let another). At the very least I would like to see it as an article considered for deletion so that the subject could be discussed. I hope that you will reconsider letting that article be brought back (I notice it has been redirected several times) or telling me why it is not an article worth having (a very similar term, choad, has it's own article). I tried to write an article that had some culutral refrences as well as a diffention of the term without unnessessarry vulgarity. I know several people have written an article with the same title as either a joke or a simple defintion. This means redirecting the refernce deletes my article without giving it a chance for discussion. The problem with redirecting this article to wikitonary site is that the term there is completly diffrent in meaning. However the article was redirected within an hour, or less, of it's posting and so had no chance to expanded on by others. I tried to note this in the article and felt that this would be expanded on if the article was allowed to stand. Thanks/ wangi 16:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC) Reply (moved from my talk page - wangi 18:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC)) Reply Now as to my article that you redirected to wikitonary I wrote that article because I felt that it had cultural relevance. I note too that the entry on wiktionary has recent had the sexual meaning removed too.
Sorry Cenestrad I was probably a bit quick there in reverting your edit ( ) - I'm far too used to the kiddie edits this page constantly gets! I'm still unsure though what to do - that entry is still a dictionary definition and ignores the other - normal - meanings of taint which would require adding even more dict defs. This is pretty funny considering there is a huge discussion about the taint.
0 kommentar(er)
