Talk:וויקיווערטערבוך

וויקיווערטערבוך
Tagged for speedy deletion as it mean Wiktionary and Wiktionary has been deleted. But I don't think that logic works, or not every time so I'm bringing it here. --Mglovesfun (talk) 14:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No, that logic doesn't work at all. (It's the contrapositive of the argument that English entries be kept because their translations are inclusible, which, likewise, doesn't work.) This is an issue for RFV, where it will, I guess (not having looked for cites), be deleted. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ¶ Considering that the English version — which is the most popular translation — does not succeed as a part of Anglic lexicon, would it be irrational to assume the less popular translations also fail in their lexicons? ¶ Regardless, I don’t care anymore if this entry will be deleted. I do not understand how entries like Victionarium are still permitted but Wiktionary is not, but I have no interest now. --Pilcrow 19:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * WT:BRAND doesn't seem to apply, not a 'physical' product. --Mglovesfun (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It is physical: it exists in bits on servers. We applied WT:BRAND to Wiktionary. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I rescind my previous statement. --Mglovesfun (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, because according to your reading, all products are physical and "physical product" is a pleonasm aka redundant wording. --Dan Polansky 08:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sort of. More accurately I can't think of a product that couldn't be described as 'physical'. It does depend on what you interpret 'physical' to mean. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

kept as the reason for deletion is OBE anyway. Feel free to take it to RFV is you really want. -- Liliana • 21:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)