Appendix talk:List of protologisms by topic

RFDO discussion: June–December 2014
I propose to delete this, since Appendix:List of protologisms/A-P and Appendix:List of protologisms/Q-Z are more than sufficient for the purpose of listing protologisms. Note that Votes/pl-2013-09/Deleting list of protologisms failed. --Dan Polansky (talk) 22:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I support deleting in part, because there is a lot of junk on the page, but would like to salvage the time and technology sections, which have some redeeming propositions. bd2412 T 19:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @BD, are you done "salvaging"? If not, maybe userfy? — Keφr 18:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * My thinking was to salvage those by deleting everything else on the page and leaving them behind. However, I have now socked these away in a sandbox, so I have no objection to the deletion of the entire page. bd2412 T 15:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. 'Tis indeed a strange junkyard. Equinox ◑ 20:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, if this is not already obvious from the above. — Keφr 05:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: I'm seeing an argument for fixing, not for deletion. Pur ple back pack 89  13:24, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

If it is resolved that this be deleted, I ask that it instead be moved to User:I'm so meta even this acronym/Deleted appendix for protologisms by topic, where I can cull anything worthwhile from it at my leisure. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have moved this as requested by ISMETA; that should also resolve PBP's concerns, since the material still exists to be accessed an worked on, in user space. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:40, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, bd2412. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I am not sure I can trust Acronym on what is or is not "worthwhile", but I am fine with this closure. — Keφr 16:15, 30 November 2014 (UTC) — ?  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)