Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chudai

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 delete. Cirt (talk) 04:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chudai[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. Wikipedia is not a multi-lingual dictionary. Anna Lincoln 10:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following similar article created by the same editor for the same reason:

Delete I had nominated this for a speedy; then withdrew it as I realised it didn't qualify for the same. Was going to Afd it myself. I agree with Anna Lincoln's pov on both articles. Can we have a WP:SNOW clause active here? ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 16:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree, there is little hope of an encyclopedic article on this subject. Only other thought would be that this might work as a redirect - but do we redirect from non-english translations of common terms? I dunno. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 13:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obviously. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I see no point at all in keeping it. I see no point in the redirect either: this is English Wikipedia, and it is not reasonable to start creating redirects for vast numbers of foreign language words; is there any reason to make a special case for this one? I don't see that there is. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to lack of content.Bjones (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both: Per WP:NOT#DICT. Joe Chill (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, content doesn't justify a separated page in Wikipedia. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 18:05, 10 February 2010 (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.