Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sed ipse Spiritus postulat pro nobis, gemitibus inenarrabilibus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. — Aitias // discussion 00:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sed ipse Spiritus postulat pro nobis, gemitibus inenarrabilibus[edit]
- Sed ipse Spiritus postulat pro nobis, gemitibus inenarrabilibus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This phrase might have independent notabilty, but nothing has been done to establish this in the article. Lampman (talk) 14:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm, part of a verse from the Latin Vulgate manuscript of the Bible. I don't know why this would be any more notable than any other phrase/verse. In any case the article only says it's "famous" and does not make a claim to notability. Delete, I guess. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 15:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Much as I like Latin language topics, the English Wikipedia and its article titles ought to be in English. Some Latin phrases from the Epistle to the Romans might be noteworthy as English language titles (e.g. Quis separabit?) because of use as mottoes and such, but this phrase is not so used AFAIK. Not a likely search term that should be redirected to the article on the epistle, either. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 18:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Orphaned and unlikely search term. The article says it's a biblical phrase but gives no indication why it's important nor does it give any indication why it would warrant a separate article. - Mgm|(talk) 09:54, 20 February 2009 (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.