Talk:▪█───█▪

▪█───█▪
Apart from the fact that this will prohibitively hard to cite, this is not a word, even in the extended sense that includes emoticons. ;), for instance, at least conveys some semantic information which makes it more than simply a pictogram - "I had quite a workout today" has a different nuance to "I had quite a workout today ;)". ▪█───█▪ on the other hand conveys no information beyond being a picture of dumbbells barbells. "I had quite a workout today ▪█───█▪" has precisely the same nuance as "I had quite a workout today", it just has a bit of ASCII art at the end of it. Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's pretty cool, tho. --Itkilledthecat (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * delete - A magnificent zero native Google hits. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Google doesn't index some characters, so they cannot be searched for. Equinox ◑ 12:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Cute, but unattested (and possibly unattestable). Astral (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I think may be hard to cite but that it is worth keeping, and I can image "I ▪█───█▪ so much today!", and "▪█───█▪ time" as being even more useful than gym time =). The bottom line is we have emoticons and even sign language and this is every word in every language; why not some jockular terms then?Lucifer (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's "every word", not "every picture". This isn't a word. Equinox ◑ 12:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Is :) not a picture?Lucifer (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but there seems to be long consensus to keep emoticons (I'd personally prefer to relegate them to an appendix): they do express a mood or feeling, whereas the weights is just a picture of weights. :) doesn't mean "a face". Equinox ◑ 22:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 05:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, outside our scope. —Angr 08:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's an image, so it's outside our scope. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Are we to get rid of all our emoticons? Relegate them to an appendix? I'd be okay with that. I suspect many editors here wouldn't. What's the difference between ▪█───█▪ and :-)? Smurrayinchester (above, in this section) suggests ;) "conveys some semantic information" — but so does any picture (except a mere scribble, I suppose). That can't be the criterion by which we let in ASCII art (or, as in this case, Unicode art). I say delete here. And if I said to keep that 3===D entry, whatever it was, then I regret it. Delete that one, too. As for emoticons, I'm torn, but in the end I think delete them, too. (Relegate them to an appendix, that is.) &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. As Equinox points out above, it's "every word", not "every picture". Do we not have an appendix for emoticons? bd2412 T 17:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

deleted per overwhelming consensus -- Liliana • 19:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * With the strikethrough it looks even more realistic! 00:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)