Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sorta-

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.--Kubigula (talk) 03:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorta-[edit]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. The cited reference is to a proposal, not to an official SI document, and cannot be regarded as a WP:RS Mayalld (talk) 18:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Mayalld (talk) 18:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? Maybe you're right. They could be just an opinion from Jim Blower. I would still like to ask that the articles not be deleted until they are proven to be false.User:Veraladeramanera (talk) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. They aren't official SI prefixes and the proposal comes from Dr. James V. Blowers, a computer scientist (according to his resume), not an organisation. Everyone could think of various prefixes to apply, and I don't think we need an article for each imagined prefix. For me it would be fine to have an article proposals for extended SI prefixes or something like that, but maintaining individual articles to describe something that does not really exist is not appropriate I think. NerdyNSK (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - We already have the article - see below. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Did someone get paid to come up with this label for a number? In addition to "sorta-" how about "kinda-, woulda-, coulda-, shoulda, and why-I-oughta-" ~since there is an infinite series of three place orders of magnitude. Edison (talk)
- It gets worse! See non-SI unit prefix for groucho-, harpo-, etc. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. According to BIPM, these are not in official use. The prefixes, as proposed, seem to exist solely on somebody's mindspring.com web page. This isn't the place for things made up one day. I can't even call WP:CRYSTAL on this. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless reliably sourced. Also, should be removed from Non-SI prefix if not sourced. DCEdwards ¹⁹⁶⁶ 19:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rediect to non-SI unit prefix. I would prefer to say delete as something Jim Blower thought up one day but we do have it in an article so no harm in redirecting. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:16, 1 July 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.