Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Greek and Latin roots in English

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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. I still stand by my argument and think this should be on Wiktionary, but I acknowledge that there is no chance of this passing. (non-admin closure) LjL (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Greek and Latin roots in English[edit]

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

This seems to strikingly fail WP:NOTDICTIONARY. It's an interesting and useful list, and it appears to be well-made, but Wiktionary would be a much better place for it, where it would also have the ability to be expressed in a more powerful and searchable way than as a textual list. This article's sheer WP:LENGTH testifies how unwieldy it is to treat this topic as a Wikipedia list. I suggest userfying and moving to Wiktionary in due time. LjL (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. LjL (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. LjL (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. LjL (talk) 15:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - think it's a very well-made list and extremely useful - Cannot see how it would fit into dictionary apart from having to include each entry as a separate individual entry. And it's very informative to have both Greek and Latin roots for comparison. I have only just happened upon this list so clearly it needs more linking to. It could possibly be made more known and useful by including referrals in leads of many pages. Also seems that the length is irrelevant - it's not an article.--Iztwoz (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is it not an article? Of course it's an article. Lists are articles. They are defined as such on Wikipedia and must follow article rules (aside from list rules). And yes, of course, you'd make this fit into Wiktionary by having each entry be an individual entry: that way, the entries could actually be, you know, searched. Like dictionary entries. And if you still wanted to see a full list, you could, as you'd just have to give each entry a Category:Greek or Latin root in English and browse that category, because that's why categories exist (on Wikipedia but also on Wiktionary). LjL (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I meant it's not a page that anyone would read through from beginning to end - but one that would be referred to - as such the length is irrelevant. Don't understand your stance on this - do you propose that all lists be passed to Wiktionary? --Iztwoz (talk) 10:23, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also from WP:Lists - #For the general reader - "Lists should enhance the encyclopedic value of content rather than diminish it". Which to my mind is exactly what this list does. --Iztwoz (talk) 10:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All lists that basically are dictionary-type list (even if they don't constitute a whole general dictionary obviously), sure. Per WP:NOTDICTIONARY - it's written down, I'm not making it up. What I don't understand is this feeling I get that Wiktionary is being treated as a second-class citizen and even if things are more appropriate there than here, it's undesirable to move them unless absolutely unavoidable. Because that's the feeling I get from this AfD so far. LjL (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - A hard one, but since there are so many sources about Greek and Latin roots and their role in the English language this does ultimately meet WP:LISTGLOSSARY. The argument regarding length is poor. Not only is there no maximum, but this is a list of X and Y. Shouldn't it be obvious that if it's too long, it should just be split into a list of X and a list of Y? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both would still be pretty long though, Rhododendrites. But I consider my length argument secondary to the WP:NOTDICTIONARY one and to the simple fact that this seems so well suited to Wiktionary. I don't want this content wiped out, but it could be in a much more useful format in a more suitable place. LjL (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that Greek and Latin roots in English is an encyclopedic subject in addition to a lexicographical subject. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair point Rhododendrites but I think under that line of reasoning, the topic would be encyclopedic if treated in prose as a description of how Greek and Latin roots entered English and developed within it, with prominent examples, while a listing of them would be a lexicographical subject. LjL (talk) 15:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also fair. I agree that we should do a better job of covering the subject in prose, but I don't agree that this list has no place on Wikipedia to support that prose. It's certainly not cut and dry though. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:22, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:44, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - important enough topic on Wikipedia that we are justified having an article on here rather than kicking people over to Wiktionary. Blythwood (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm resigned at this point to seeing this article kept, but I won't stop pointing out how appalling I find the fact that various people use wording like "kicking people over to Wiktionary". It seems that many Wikipedians have a very low opinion of their sister project Wiktionary, which is probably only to be used for dictionary topics that are not very "important"... LjL (talk) 15:23, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP THIS IT IS VERY USEFUL DO NOT DELETE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbents (talk • contribs) 21:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:LISTGLOSSARY. Btw I just noticed the article List of Greek words with English derivatives has been unfortunately recently deleted, while similar articles are still on. Was the deletion a discrimination against Greek language or what? Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 07:54, 1 March 2016 (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.