Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Failure - Knowledge

Source 📝

93:: There may be abstract nouns out there that have enough cultural weight or history to require an encyclopedia page describing them. I contend that "Failure" is not one of these. The article is essentially empty, as it pretty much should be entirely. It belongs only in Wiktionary. 95:
I was at first shocked to see that there are groups of Wikipedians who spend time deleting pages they feel are unencyclopedic; it wasn't until I saw this article that I understood the need for them.
110:: "Failure" is used in enough contexts and disciplines to deserve a page. Someday someone will expand nicely on the "Criteria" section, and the "See also" is itself worth keeping the page. 151:
agree with Lunsford, at very least this should be a disambig page. I could see these statements expanded and sourced. I think there might be a place here for the
51: 228: 126: 199: 17: 358: 36: 357:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
241: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
311: 224: 275: 122: 262:
The article is about the concept of failure and its application in culture, it's not merely a defintion.
195: 220: 118: 190: 182: 216: 114: 152: 291: 185: 343: 331: 319: 278: 266: 254: 204: 173: 159: 143: 99: 82: 298: 96: 78: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
328: 212:
it, because failure is not one of the words in which a wikipedia should have a page for.
340: 156: 140: 74: 170: 287: 263: 239:
This article discusses far more than the dictionary definition of the word.
73:
Completing unfinished AFD nomination. Nominated by User:Steverapaport —
65: 351:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
181:, valid encyclopedic article, ridiculous AFD nomination. -- 55: 139:
It belongs in Wiktionary, without the lists of lists.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 361:). No further edits should be made to this page. 8: 327:Might need cleanup, but definitely keep. 49: 7: 24: 339:. See also: this nomination. 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 1: 344:19:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC) 332:01:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC) 320:22:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC) 279:21:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 267:21:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 255:20:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 205:16:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 174:15:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 160:15:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 144:13:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 100:20:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC) 83:13:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC) 378: 61:14:30, Sep. 6, 2006 (UTC) 129:) 21:15, 1 September 2006 354:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 153:failure googlebomb 276:Danny Lilithborne 233: 219:comment added by 131: 117:comment added by 369: 356: 315: 308: 303: 297: 253: 251: 246: 232: 213: 188: 130: 111: 34: 377: 376: 372: 371: 370: 368: 367: 366: 365: 359:deletion review 352: 318: 313: 304: 299: 295: 247: 242: 240: 214: 203: 186: 112: 69: 44:The result was 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 375: 373: 364: 363: 347: 346: 334: 322: 310: 292:(aeropagitica) 281: 269: 257: 234: 207: 193: 176: 163: 162: 146: 133: 132: 104: 103: 97:Steve Rapaport 87: 86: 68: 63: 60: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 374: 362: 360: 355: 349: 348: 345: 342: 338: 335: 333: 330: 326: 323: 321: 317: 316: 309: 307: 302: 293: 289: 285: 282: 280: 277: 273: 270: 268: 265: 261: 258: 256: 252: 250: 245: 238: 235: 230: 226: 222: 218: 211: 208: 206: 201: 197: 192: 189: 184: 180: 177: 175: 172: 169:Looks useful 168: 165: 164: 161: 158: 154: 150: 147: 145: 142: 138: 135: 134: 128: 124: 120: 116: 109: 106: 105: 102: 101: 98: 92: 89: 88: 85: 84: 80: 76: 71: 70: 67: 64: 62: 59: 57: 53: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 353: 350: 336: 324: 312: 305: 300: 283: 271: 259: 248: 243: 236: 221:82.47.168.92 215:— Preceding 209: 178: 166: 148: 136: 119:Lunsford2000 113:— Preceding 107: 94: 90: 72: 50: 45: 43: 31: 28: 329:Linguofreak 274:per above. 171:User:Yy-bo 341:RFerreira 157:Borisblue 155:as well. 306:spinster 229:contribs 217:unsigned 141:BTLizard 127:contribs 115:unsigned 249:gitica) 244:(aeropa 191:nce Ong 108:Keep it 75:ERcheck 66:Failure 210:Delete 137:Delete 91:Delete 301:disco 52:freak 16:< 337:Keep 325:Keep 314:talk 290:and 288:Dina 286:per 284:Keep 272:Keep 264:Dina 260:Keep 237:Keep 225:talk 179:Keep 167:Keep 149:Keep 123:talk 79:talk 56:talk 46:keep 296:... 183:Ter 48:. — 294:. 231:) 227:• 198:| 125:• 81:) 223:( 202:) 200:C 196:T 194:( 187:e 121:( 77:( 58:) 54:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
deletion review
freak
talk
Failure
ERcheck
talk
13:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Steve Rapaport
20:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
unsigned
Lunsford2000
talk
contribs
BTLizard
13:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
failure googlebomb
Borisblue
15:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
User:Yy-bo
15:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Ter
e
nce Ong
T
C
16:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
unsigned
82.47.168.92
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.