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 a strong consensus to delete. Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:47, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of English words of Italian origin[edit]

List of English words of Italian origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Violates the policy WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This article is really a mini-dictionary, with a very slight discussion at the top. An article on Italian influence of the English language might be possible, but I don't see how a list of words belongs in an encyclopedia which says it is not a dictionary. Borock (talk) 19:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about Wiktionary? It seems to me that a good digital dictionary should be searchable by the origin of words. Then readers can generate their own lists. Borock (talk) 16:09, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing in WP:List supports this kind of page. The closest thing is a glossary page. "A Glossary page presents encyclopedically explanatory definitions for specialized terms in a subject area." This is not a glossary since the words are not on the list because of a common subject area, but rather because of their origins. You are correct that the sourcing is poor, but that is not the problem that I see. What if you had lists of English words of Anglo-Saxon, French, Galic, Norse, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Native American, Chinese, Japanese origins, and so forth? Put them all together and what would you have? Borock (talk) 20:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Everything you are talking about is dictionary material. An encyclopedia is supposed to be about topics, a dictionary about words. This is the main point of the "not a dictionary" policy.Borock (talk) 05:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LIST It aids in navigation, shows links to articles of a similar nature. Its a fine list article. Dream Focus 16:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a look at a handful. Quite a few I tagged as potentially not notable, needing references or needing more references. I encourage you to do the same. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This list came to my attention because it was linked from another AfD. I'd be happy to vote to delete any other mini-dictionary lists. And I certainly have nothing against Italy. Borock (talk) 00:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the next one: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English words of Korean origin. Borock (talk) 12:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. As I said, the whole lot of them should go, and I'd vote against them all per WP:NAD. I've just voted against the Korean article, in fact. Thanks for the heads up. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 13:03, 15 August 2011 (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.