Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
comments |
|||
Line 18:
*'''Keep and rewrite''' - if this is genuinely notable and/or refers to some real thing about which there could be an article, then I suggest stripping down this one into a stub and sticking {{tl|expand}} at the top. There's no need to delete something just because it's a stub or because it's been badly written - it just needs more work. --[[User:Alfakim|<font style="border: solid 2px #4F87F9; background-color: #CBE6FF" color=#4f87f9>''' Alfakim '''</font>]]-- [[User_talk:Alfakim|<font style="border: solid 2px #4F87F9; background-color: #CBE6FF" color=#4f87f9>''' talk '''</font>]] 19:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
** But then again, how much do you think this thing could be expanded? At best, you could have correct attribution and some history, which would still leave a pretty small article and what Wikiquotes is still much better for. I honestly don't think this could be expanded to encyclopedic proportions. As far as I know, the quote hasn't inspired much else besides gracing the quote books and fortune cookie databases everywhere. --''[[User:Wwwwolf|wwwwolf]]'' ([[User talk:Wwwwolf|barks]]/[[Special:Contributions/Wwwwolf|growls]]) 15:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''transwiki''' to Wikiquotes. I seem to recall reading this before, years ago in College. Seems the most appropriate thing to do. [[User:Roodog2k|Roodog2k]] 21:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
** As I said above, it's [[q:Mark Twain#Misattributions|already in Wikiquotes]], so I think it can be safely deleted from here. --''[[User:Wwwwolf|wwwwolf]]'' ([[User talk:Wwwwolf|barks]]/[[Special:Contributions/Wwwwolf|growls]]) 15:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
| |||