Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Greek versions of names

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. Numerically, this is pretty close, but I find the arguments for delete stronger and far more convincing. Many of the proponents for keeping this point to other stuff, which is not a strong position, especially when I'm not confident some of that other stuff would survive a rigorous AfD themselves. I'm somewhat amenable to the OSE argument when used as an argument that this page could be improved or revamped in the style of another, but it's a weak argument without evidence it can be done. In contrast, the chief arguments for deletion point to the guideline for stand-alone lists, in particular the appropriate topics and inclusion criteria sections; that's a stronger stance and appears applicable to the page in question.

Editor's note: As I was considering closing this and drafting the above statement, three more !votes came in. It doesn't change my opinion of the consensus, but I did consider note closing and relisting it as an active discussion. However, this has been open for three weeks now, and I suspect the main reason more participants are coming is because this is the last AfD from the day (which is how I found it); that's supported by the fact that it has been relisted twice, once with no additional input, so I feel I am not shutting off an ongoing, productive conversation by closing this. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:26, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Greek versions of names (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a lexicon, a type of dictionary, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Pontificalibus 09:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (Article author) I can't see why an article: "List of names of European cities in different languages" can exist and not this one. Plus, most of them are old disused terns and have encylopedic value. This article tries to help users reading old Greek encyclopedias to understand about who are talking about. Like a list of terms or symbols.(TakisA1 (talk) 11:12, 31 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]
• Delete Duplicated by Google Translate and for the most part, every side link to el.wiki. Nate • (chatter) 16:45, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, probably. I note that there is a List of Latinised names, and on its Talk page is the comment "some of the names included in this article are actually hellenised rather than latinised". One of the names identified as hellenised was coined in the Early Middle Ages (Maimonides), some are described as "Coined by Anglo-Norman scribes", some in the Renaissance (eg Gersonides). So there is room for expansion of the current list to include last names; female names (all the names in the current list are male); names which were hellenized at different periods (including possibly names like Xerxes which were hellenized (or written in Greek form) by Herodotus), etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebeccaGreen (talk • contribs) 17:09 31 January 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. The Latinised list is a red herring. That list contains mostly names of famous individuals that are commonly used in the English language (other than the Coined by Anglo-Norman scribes#Surnames subsection, which needs to be cut down drastically). The Greek list just gives translations of generic common names, and is haphazard, to say the least. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:46, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No significant notability and WP:NOTDICT. Ajf773 (talk) 07:47, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is "significant notability"? postdlf (talk) 03:30, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Insignificantly notable: Charles Alexander (cricketer, born 1839). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Δελετε per NOTDICT WP:LISTGLOSSARY: "Glossaries – alphabetical, topical lists of terms, rather than of notable entities – are encyclopedic when the entries they provide are primarily informative explorations of the listed terminology, pertaining to a notable topic that already has its own main article on Wikipedia." Also, even a partially complete list of common given names (or uncommon - Ormond?) would be very long. (And the list is 100% male names.) Clarityfiend (talk) 10:54, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Fails WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value". Even a partially complete list of common given names (or uncommon - Ormond?) would be very long. (And the list is 100% male names.) Clarityfiend (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep ish. I agree with what RebeccaGreen has said. As for the widely cited WP:NOTDICT, the only aspect of it that I see relevant here is WP:WORDISSUBJECT. And no, this list isn't duplicated by what you can expect google translate or the interwiki links to do; but maybe the article needs a clarification of its scope, to avoid similar misunderstandings? – Uanfala (talk) 15:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Point taken. I have replaced NOTDICT with LISTGLOSSARY as my rationale. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• KeepThis is more than a list, there is a third column.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 05:50, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Per User:Clarityfiend, Wikipedia:SALAT, as well as an apparent bias. Why do we keep arguing keep because other stuff exists when this is continually argued as not being a good argument at AFD? I see three references for four names out of 117. It really doesn't matter how much we like it right? WOW! More than a list because it has a third column? The lead in the article states "In order for a Greek name to appear in this list it must be used by at least 3 printed books." so if this is not just original research or synthesis where are the sources?. If the "Hellenisation of names" was important should they not be listed in the appropriate articles (ex. Edward under Variant forms, etymology, or something? Otr500 (talk) 16:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Author Comment: I have added more collumns and I will try to source every name. You can check a name by simply googling in and going to 'books'. Also with the same logic these should also be deleted: [1] (TakisA1 (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC))[reply]

@User talk:TakisA1 I am open to seeing if an article is salvageable. --"But" FYI-- Wikipedia is not a reliable source so you need to use independent sources or ones that are reliable from those pages. Otr500 (talk) 01:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:SALAT. Subject is far too general for a Wikipedia list. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's an indiscriminate collection of information that says nothing why the list is of encyclopedic importance. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:15, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not useful; can't even link the items in the table to other WP articles (a measure of a still-useful list). Just a dictionary. Can't see why a reader would come to WP for this? Britishfinance (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Linguistic history of this language, including names, is inherently notable. These names have articles, wikilink the list, add categories. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:17, 22 February 2019 (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.