Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xeper

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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Please defer merge discussion to article talk. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xeper

Wikipedia is not a dictionary, much less an egyptian hieroglyphic dictionary Kheper (misspelled Xeper here) is an egyptian hieroglyph with no semantic meaning. While words like Ankh have semantic meanings, if we allow kheper to exist, we have to theoretically allow several hundred other symbols without semantic meanings, and any other egyptian word as well. Thanatosimii 20:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Deville (Talk) 02:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki to Wikitionary, unless there is already an entry there, in which case just delete it. TJ Spyke 02:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. --Metropolitan90 06:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Michael 07:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retain but retitle it to the dominant spellling. It has been expanded to include reference to the Temple of Set. GeorgeLouis 14:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per GeorgeLouis, and with the articles on Ä, S, Й inter alia as precedent for "articles on symbols without semantic meaning". Tonywalton | Talk 10:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep don't know if hieroglyph's are dictionary item's. User:Yy-bo 14:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Probably the best thing to do with this would be to merge it with the section from dung beetle which is not about the insect, but about the Egyptian use of images of dung beetles as amulets, at a new article Scarab (amulet). The ancient Egyptian use of the beetle as a symbol is certainly worth an article, but that article should have an English language title. I presume the spelling "Xeper" is meant to represent χeper, which was E. A. Wallis Budge's transliteration. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the above, let us remember that cross, Star of David and pentagram all have their entries. I am sure you can find more examples of religious symbols throughout WP. As for the spelling, I suppose as a religious symbol we should tend in the direction of Xeper. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 18:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a dictionary.-Kmaguir1 20:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to either List of hieroglyphs or an appropriate sub-article of Egyptian hieroglyphs, assuming it isn't a hoax, cause I can't find the image on those articles. GRBerry 01:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will point out again that this is not just any old symbol, but one that is used in a religious context. No, I am not a Satanist; I am an atheist. Your friend, GeorgeLouis

Comment. All this talk about a religious semantic is pointless in this instance, since that data is not actually in the page in question. This page is about a fairly insignificant hieroglyph, not the philosophy of the temple of set. And a page on a hieroglyph, probably with the exception of Ankh, is cruft. Thanatosimii 03:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the data as suggested. GeorgeLouis 14:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the temple of set stuff is legit, by all means let it stay (although not necesarrily in this article, perhaps then a redirect will be in order), however everything above "philosophy" in this article is still cruft, and rather erronious. Thanatosimii 16:17, 5 September 2006 (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.