Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motorcade

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 keep. Mostly Rainy 02:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Motorcade[edit]

I am not sure about this nomination. However, it looks like it is a dictionnary article. It could be redirected to some appropriate page (which page?). Short of this, it's a delete Tony Bruguier 00:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if expanded (possibly with something on JFK?), and delete if left a dicdef (don't transwiki since, as of now, Wiktionary has a much more lengthier definition on the subject)--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 00:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Comment, no vote: One option is to keep as article. Another is to convert to dab page, with links to wiktionary, notable motorcade cars, uses of the term in popular culture (Motorcade of Generosity), etc. If that is not realistic, soft redirect to wiktionary. —Viriditas | Talk 01:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but expand This article needs to have a history of motorcades to push it beyond dicdef territory Bwithh 01:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - needs work. SM247 02:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep definitely. There is, believe it or not, theory and science behind how to arrange a motorcade and defend the principal. Would make for a great article. - Richardcavell 03:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. --Ter e nc e Ong 09:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Richardcavell. --UsaSatsui 10:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. --Varco 15:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but needs some work. --Themillofkeytone 18:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Expand or move to Wiktionary ILove Plankton ⁽ ^L⁾ 20:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep expand digital_m e^(t/c) 20:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this article and allow it to expand. Yamaguchi先生 23:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This article is short now, but has the potential to expand into a good encyclopedia article. — TheKMan^talk 23:50, 31 May 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.