Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of lumberjack jargon

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 TRANSWIKI and DELETE appears to be the way of things. And it was too tagged and this

List of lumberjack jargon[edit]

Violates WP:WINAD#Wikipedia is not a slang or idiom guide" and WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a dictionary" Frühstücksdienst 03:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — ciphergoth 16:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uncertain. I don't consider this an unreasonable subject for an article, but I'm concerned that it might be a copyvio, depending on how much is copied for the cited book and whether said book is still under copyright. No vote at this time. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary. Lists of words are not Wikipedia material. Stifle 00:03, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the copyright concerns can be resolved, transwiki to Wiktionary and delete from Wikipedia. Rossami (talk) 06:38, 1 March 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.