Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political terminology

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 redirect to Politics. Currently a NN dicdef. Nothing to merge. Leave open for re-creation at another time. Bearian (talk) 00:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political terminology[edit]

WP:NOT#DICTIONARY. Maybe redirect to Politics. Captain panda 23:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, contents of article are essentially "political terminology is terminology used in politics". Not even sure it's a valid redirect candidate, as who would search for this when they meant "politics"? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Redirect to technical terminology. It seems to be a parallel to e.g. medical terminology or scientific terminology (the latter a redirect). There might be an article here someday, but this is not helpful in its current state. (Or what about a soft redirect to Category:Political terms? Do we do that?) --Dhartung | Talk 01:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete: the article does not teach me anything new. It isn't even a list of political terms. I see no need for a redirect either, unless an administrator proffers evidence that a significant number of people have typed it into the search box. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Define significant number. Even if the page receives one hit every few days, it means that people are looking for information, and in my view it is better to help the few by redirecting to where the information may be found than to leave them staring at a blank page, which may prompt them to create the article again, bringing us here again. Per a new shiny traffic statistics counter, this article received a couple of hits in December, January, and February, despite not being created until March, so people are looking for information on this term. -- saberwyn 03:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Either soft redirect to Category:Political terms, or as a second choice just delete. The article in its current status has no meaningful content, and turning it into a List of political terms would violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I realize that cross-namespace redirects are considered undesirable, but a soft redirect to Category:Political terms might help users find what they were looking for. If that's not acceptable, the article should be deleted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A classic example of an article that has nothing to say, and says it. Nice addition is that the terms are "mostly quite contextual to each society and political society". Very sophisticated. Mandsford (talk) 05:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Question - what is the nominator asking for? a deletion, or a redirect? Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 09:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I guess I didn't make that clear. I was thinking that either would work. Captain panda 13:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete um...I'm not shure there is any thing worth murging.Coffeepusher (talk) 16:03, 1 March 2008 (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.