Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smidge

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 redirect to wikt:smidge. Soft redirect to wikt:smidge SilkTork *^YES! 16:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smidge

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

Contested prod. Non-notable neologism, appears to be little more than a dictionary definition. TN X Man 21:56, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is just a dictionary definition of a legitimate and recognized English word, even though the article represents the word as being a neologism. I disagree with the nom about the word being non-notable and a neologism, but nevertheless this article should be deleted because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. No transwiki to Wiktionary is necessary; see wikt:smidge which already exists. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:25, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 01:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:NOTDICT. Timotheus Canens (talk) 02:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No objections to a soft redirect. Timotheus Canens (talk) 14:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing wrong with the article, but it belongs in a dictionary not an encyclopedia. Northwestgnome (talk) 07:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would be appropriate to place a soft redirect to Wiktionary here. "Smidge" is a plausible search term, and redirecting to a dictionary is more helpful to end-users than simply deleting the material.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 10:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Dictionary term already included in Wikitionary as shown here [1]. Just-An-Average-Guy (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- — æk ^Talk 02:49, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wiktionary, per WP:NOTDICT. — æk ^Talk 02:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wikt:smidge per WP:NOTDIC. Cnilep (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question When is a soft redirect appropriate for a dicdef? I haven't run across any before that I recall. Шизомби (SZ) (talk) 18:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect seems appropriate here. Cocytus [»talk«] 22:27, 3 January 2010 (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.